Is preparation/learning about relationships only bad when it comes to sex?

masterrod · 2014-01-26T17:32:56+00:00

The more I read about on PPD. It seems that people are ok with preparation as it relates to love and intimacy, but not ok when it comes to sleeping with women....

[–]lokidemon731 22 points23 points24 points 12 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]lokidemon731 21 points22 points23 points 12 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

[–]lokidemon731 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]lokidemon731 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

No. Everyone is not you. It is impossible for you to truly believe it, that doesn't mean it's impossible for everyone. Also, romantic gestures aren't based on the act itself, it's the thought, time, and effort that go into them that make them important and special.

Both of these actions are completely deliberate.

Are you saying they are purposefully meant to deceive? In most instances, they genuinely are not.

using the same type "misinformation",

Nope. Using put downs, instilling fear, and otherwise harming your partner in order to get your way is not the same as saying something that you believe to be true.

So I don't really see your point here.

Because you can't understand things outside your own perspective. Also you completely overlooked my other point, which is that TRP is full of people saying "genders are separate but equal except men are better".

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

No. Everyone is not you.

:)

It is impossible for you to truly believe it, that doesn't mean it's impossible for everyone. Also, romantic gestures aren't based on the act itself, it's the thought, time, and effort that go into them that make them important and special.

Unfortunately, romance isn't real. It's completely and utterly fictitious. Although, it may feel real, but it isn't. What it is behavior applied to the the appropriate situation, and a desired behavioral result is attained.

Nope. Using put downs, instilling fear, and otherwise harming your partner in order to get your way is not the same as saying something that you believe to be true.

Negging done improperly will make a girl recoil and her pussy dry up. I don't advocate abuse that's physically harming a woman. I agree with you 100% on these aspects.

"saying something you believe to be true"

Well, that's is what TRP is, Acting as if these "truths" are true.

It's no different from saying that "I love you with all my heart, more so than anyone else in the world. And i will always be true, etc". In saying something like this, there is a specific intent involved, and expectations for saying this. But the goal isn't pussy, it's intimacy. I think women believe that to be permissible, whether the guy learned or just spontaneously said it. Even if his actions later are antithetical to the statement, that feeling of that moment can be very real to that woman, regardless of the logic of that statement.

Because you can't understand things outside your own perspective. Also you completely overlooked my other point, which is that TRP is full of people saying "genders are separate but equal except men are better".

Thanks for pointing that out. That sucks. I think TRP more deep than that statement.

I also have problem with statement cause it seems to advocate homosexuality. I mean if women suck so much, then why try to fuck them?

I personally think women are awesome, just sucky as friends.There are few things in my life that I like more than taking a woman from 0, to ecstasy, to orgasm on my own terms.

[–]lokidemon731 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Again, it isn't the gesture itself, it's the fact that you are willing to put time, thought, and effort into pleasing your partner. That's real.

I think the idea that you're trying hold to the idea that romance is real is interesting. I think that might be a core belief of yours.

Romance is more like Santa Claus. We believe in it as kids, but as adults still fun. Because feeling of giving is real. Even though Christmas, or even holidays are just arbitrary times in the year to give someone something.

Romance brings a fantasy moment into the relationship. It may feel real, and it's supposed to, but underlying it's still just fantasy. And, having a relationship without blips of fantasy is pure drudgery. So it's necessary, but that doesn't make romance real. Real meaning something you can touch or taste or even logically support.

Even the effort doesn't matter, what matters is the feeling a woman feels when the romantic event happens. She might find reasons, but nothing is worth more than than the feeling.

Acting and truly believing are two very different things.

True. I think the intent of TRP is for people to truly believe these things. I could see how some women could abhor that notion. Even if it were for "good".

See, this is a problem too. You're basically saying that you think women are awesome only because you enjoy sex with them. How is that different than saying a woman is only worth her pussy? How is saying that women make sucky friends not putting women on a level below you?

That's just one thing I like women. I love feminine and everything that's part of it. I love the quiet sexy of a older woman. I love how women can just go with emotions and live. I'm shocked at how women feel things and believe them to true even there's no logic supporting it, and still be correct. I love the temperature of women, it can be infectious, debilitating, and sometimes enlivening. I love the dance emotional dance. But I could go on and on, but sex isn't the only thing that I love about women.

I can't keep women friends, especially attractive ones, when i'm with someone. That's one reason they suck. But also they suck cause I can do more things with men. I don't make it point to watch sport with women.

These are my preferences..

As far as TRP, that's just a different aim. I think it's beneficial for men to think that pussy is very valuable to women, so they act accordingly. And i think it's the first step in understanding women. For better or for worse.

[–]lokidemon7316 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Real meaning something you can touch or taste or even logically support.

That's...a really bizarre definition of reality.

Even the effort doesn't matter

Yes, it very much does. Ok, you know how some people will buy a pre-cooked dinner and toss it in the oven, but try to make it look like they cooked it themselves? That's because they know that the extra effort it takes to home cook a meal is important. Running to the store and buying whatever you can find is not nearly as meaningful as taking hours to find something that you know your partner will really appreciate. Effort matters. A lot.

nothing is worth more than than the feeling.

Feelings are real, you know that right? Emotions are part of reality.

But I could go on and on, but sex isn't the only thing that I love about women.

Ok. Your first statement only included a love of sex with women, which made it seem like that was the only thing you cared about.

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's...a really bizarre definition of reality.

Women often think because they feel it's real. Thais is very common even in very intelligent strong women. I think in order to love a woman you just accept that's part of her reality. That's all I mean.

Yes, it very much does. Ok, you know how some people will buy a pre-cooked dinner and toss it in the oven, but try to make it look like they cooked it themselves? That's because they know that the extra effort it takes to home cook a meal is important. Running to the store and buying whatever you can find is not nearly as meaningful as taking hours to find something that you know your partner will really appreciate. Effort matters. A lot.

I'm not you're wrong. This maybe for your preference. All I mean is that the feeling when someone does some thing truly romantic for you, and you know that's because he knows: you, your heart, your feelings, and he's connected. That mere moment, that feeling of pure bliss is what matters. The effort could be great, or shallow, if the feeling were there.

Feelings are real, you know that right? Emotions are part of reality.

Emotions are real because you can't really pinpoint a logical basis for emotions. Something that's real is consistent. Emotions are often anti-logical, or inconsistent . Women in general base a lot their relationship on emotions. And, that is troubling for men, and even men that are good with women. But it something every man that wants to sleep with a woman must accept.

Emotions are internal to the person that is manifesting them.

Ok. Your first statement only included a love of sex with women, which made it seem like that was the only thing you cared about.

NO worries. :)

[–]lokidemon7312 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Women often think because they feel it's real.

What do you mean by this? When you feel something that feeling is real. If I feel like you are going to find me and kill me, that doesn't mean you actually will or plan to, but my feelings of paranoia and suspicion would be real.

you know that's because he knows: you, your heart, your feelings, and he's connected.

Is that not sincere and honest? Let's step away from "real" for a moment, because we clearly define that differently. Romantic gestures should be sincere and honest and show affection, care, and connectedness. That's what incites the emotion.

Emotions are real because you can't really pinpoint a logical basis for emotions

I'm assuming that's a typo and you meant to say aren't real? But that doesn't make sense. There's no logical basis for existence. No one knows what the purpose of life is, and yet here we are still existing, still real. There's no logical basis for sleep either, we haven't been able to figure out why we need to sleep. Still, sleep is real and we do need it.

Something that's real is consistent.

What? Not at all. I am real, but I'm not always consistent. The weather is inconsistent, the weather is real. The light that sometimes flickers in my bathroom is annoying, but still real.

Emotions are internal to the person that is manifesting them.

That doesn't mean they're not real. When someone punches you and it hurts, the pain is real. Just because it's personal doesn't mean it isn't real. I can't dream your dreams, but that doesn't change the fact that you really do have dreams.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What do you mean by this? When you feel something that feeling is real. If I feel like you are going to find me and kill me, that doesn't mean you actually will or plan to, but my feelings of paranoia and suspicion would be real.

This is sticky. Fear is an approximation,it isn't real. Usually, people fear things they don't understand. The real thing is the guy has knife, and he's coming after you. But you can't know until he's there. Sure you could be afraid, but it would take the event to happen before you know.

Or a guy wants to talk to a hot girl, he gets very afraid that he will get rejected, and doesn't do it. He may say his fear is real, or there's a legitimate reason to not talk to this lady.

In each case the feeling was simply an approximation but not a logical assessment of the problem. Real, is something something that no matter look at it exists.

I should say real and consistent. To be little bit more clear, TRP gives men the tools to see the world closer their typical view. And that is real and consistent rules, that can help work with their women when emotions tend to be overriding their behavior.

Is that not sincere and honest? Let's step away from "real" for a moment, because we clearly define that differently. Romantic gestures should be sincere and honest and show affection, care, and connectedness. That's what incites the emotion.

In the similar vein of romance, when it comes to approaching a woman the idea is to act in away that she feels guy level attraction, or alpha. In a relationship, when the man feels she's lost her way, TRP teaches him how to reignite that gut level attraction. It's a different type of feeling & goal, but the idea is to recognize her behavior and act accordingly. And in theory it is no different from a well planned out romantic gesture. Romance valued cause it doesn't usurp the power of pussy, in fact it amplifies it. TRP simply robs, or takes the power of pussy away from the lady, so it's frowned on. It seems you agree that a well thought, and effort filled romantic response is valuable. But a well thought out pickup, or relationship ploy, to get a girl in bed is not permissible . Am I correct?

Emotions are real because you can't really pinpoint a logical basis for emotions I'm assuming that's a typo and you meant to say aren't real? But that doesn't make sense. There's no logical basis for existence. No one knows what the purpose of life is, and yet here we are still existing, still real. There's no logical basis for sleep either, we haven't been able to figure out why we need to sleep. Still, sleep is real and we do need it.

True .. I fuck up sometimes ;)

What? Not at all. I am real, but I'm not always consistent. The weather is inconsistent, the weather is real. The light that sometimes flickers in my bathroom is annoying, but still real.

These are a bad examples. But I know what you mean.

Emotions are internal to the person that is manifesting them. That doesn't mean they're not real. When someone punches you and it hurts, the pain is real. Just because it's personal doesn't mean it isn't real. I can't dream your dreams, but that doesn't change the fact that you really do have dreams.

True

For a man understand his woman, he must understand that she holds, and prioritizes emotions over logic in a relationship. So men tend to think that because they do something good for woman she will have sex with them, or be with them forever. But she won't unless she feels it's right. These feelings can be inconsistent, they may even make her seem like crazy person. But that's what matters to the woman, because even though her emotions may make her seem crazy, they are real to her.

They are not real to the man, because he can't feel her emotions, just like he can't dream her dreams. Even though, if he does something that is in her head, she may consider him the one, when it's just coincidence.

[–]lokidemon7312 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He may say his fear is real, or there's a legitimate reason to not talk to this lady.

His fear being real doesn't necessarily mean that he has a legitimate reason to be afraid. It just means that he is afraid. If you don't acknowledge that his fear is real, how can you help him overcome it?

It seems you agree that a well thought, and effort filled romantic response is valuable. But a well thought out pickup, or relationship ploy, to get a girl in bed is not permissible . Am I correct?

No and the first thing I said in response to your OP was a direct contradiction of this. Trying to get laid is fine. Trying to be romantic is fine. Lying, manipulating, and otherwise hurting your partner to get laid or invoke a romantic connection is the problem.

they are real to her.

You put this whole paragraph in terms of women, but men have emotions to and those emotions are real to them. Because emotions are real and everyone feels them.

[–]masterrod2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

His fear being real doesn't necessarily mean that he has a legitimate reason to be afraid. It just means that he is afraid. If you don't acknowledge that his fear is real, how can you help him overcome it?

I'm reaching territory here. But I added consistent to real, to be more clear.

But to answer questions all you have to do show him the overhead view, that understand will eradicate the fear. But if it doesn't doing the thing that he fears will eradicate the fear, without acknowledging it's existence.

.>No and the first thing I said in response to your OP was a direct contradiction of this. Trying to get laid is fine. Trying to be romantic is fine. Lying, manipulating, and otherwise hurting your partner to get laid or invoke a romantic connection is the problem.

I think you're right on lying, but manipulation is usually done through preparation for a desired result. So I could argue romance is the same.

I'd say your right in your statement. Amd to take it further, doing anything with your mate that doesn't have your both your best interest involved. To that end, i think all is fair.

You put this whole paragraph in terms of women, but men have emotions to and those emotions are real to them. Because emotions are real and everyone feels them.

Unfortunately, emotions are only real to the people that have them. The main difference between men and women, when we talk genders, is the priority of emotions. For example, in general relationships, love is a priority for women, but not so much for men. For men it's important for them to understand that emotions can trump logic, they must take that into consideration. TRP uses sexism to explain these points, but it's a point men must understand.

[–]lokidemon7312 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lokidemon7313 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Bakerofpie3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's a really tough question you ask.

Romance is most effective when it indulges in the fantastic nature of love. That nature is not real. The ideas we were meant to be forever, i'll be with you forever, etc. Those statements aren't really realistic and they aren't even logical, they're just declarations backed up by a feeling, hopefully.

No one is meant to be with anyone. There isn't a perfect match. Romance has no basis of anything tangible.

There's a school of thought that says Romance should be something one does for someone that shows that they are connected personally. That's a great thought, but it's entirely too selfish. We are all connected, I shouldn't show my connection to one person.

Romance is an indulgent in the fantasy that 2 people were meant to only to connect with each other.

Love is the work we do together to build our relationship. It us embarking on a path bath of merging together as one person, in so doing we learn and discover ourselves. I can love my brother, my mother, my friend, etc. Love is enlivening and ideally describes a connection among everyone.

Real is hard a question. Since we're acknowledging it is real. I'm referring to the basis. Romance is based on fantasy. Love is based connections, which I believe are real in feeling. I don't know that love is real in an absolute sense.

[–]AbracadanielleBlue Pill Woman5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

This doesn't make sense to me. Isn't it a constant TRP topic, that women are allegedly unable to love men as deeply/unconditionally as men want to be loved? Wouldn't that make romance a RP/male notion? I'm pretty sure there are plenty of men who believe romance is real.

Romance is designed to take a couple a way from the realities of their relationships. So in a away it's a an indulge in fantasy.

When TRP this what they mean is women are more interested in how they feel than an unconditional agreement. So it's important that a man understand that. There's a lot sexist mantra that's attached to that, but that's the crux of it.

Wouldn't that make romance a RP/male notion? I'm pretty sure there are plenty of men who believe romance is real.

I'm not sure about this, maybe you can help me understand your view. I know that it isn't real, but that's the only way that I can do it. Cause it's humorous that giving some stupid flower is going to light up my woman's heart, but it does. So be it. I'll be the love Santa Claus when I can.

[–]AbracadanielleBlue Pill Woman5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Relationships aren't an unconditional agreement, not anymore anyways. Even marriages. It seems to me like part of what TRP is angry about is the fact that thanks to feminism, it is now less legal and less socially acceptable to force women to stay in relationships they don't want to be in.

Yes but men seem to think so. They think I bought house, take care of the kids, why is she cheating on me?

I don't think divorces are any more socially acceptable because of feminism. But feminism does help women in abusive relationship to leave.

think you're taking the idea of romance way too literally. Do you also not believe in affection? Or love in general?

I think you have two parts a relationship. You have the whole bills, responsibilities, and adult shit. Then you have all the fantasy love stuff.. It's important to balance the two. So even if it means lying to your wife and telling her dress looks wonderful when you couldn't care less, giving her a flower, or sweeping her away on a trip, you got to do it. It's that fantasy stuff that doesn't make any real sense, that enriches relationships. Especially the talk ad nasuem about things that could be solved with one simple change. If you love your woman you'll do that stuff. I know those feelings of love aren't' "real" but great when you have them. But I also know love isn't always enough to sustain a relationship.

My ideal relationship would be one which I don't have to talk to my mate, and I can sit on the couch and do nothing and she brings me food, and fucks me at a moments notice, any time any place. I know that just isn't possible.

[–]Abracadanielle2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Abracadanielle2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I will admit that deep down, everyone does want to sit on a couch all day and have someone bring them food and sex and otherwise leave them alone. As a woman, that doesn't sound unappealing to me either.

But I think that would get old fast. And it isn't what I'd call a relationship. Like you said, it isn't practical. What is the other person getting out of this? Not much. If anything.

I don't think men like a lot stuff in relationships, same with women.

I'll agree to that. But compromise is part of a healthy relationship, as well as the maturity to understand that you don't have to do everything together.

is really my partner

This makes me happy to read. I think there is the impression out there that members of TRP don't think women are capable of being actual partners, so this makes me happy to hear that it's part of your life.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]am_thro_way2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Romance is different than "being soulmates". It is more like "working towards a position where both of you will want to be together forever". It involves "action", which the "soulmate" experience doesn't. One shouldn't really take romantic advice from romcoms.

Feelings are the canvas that you, me and everybody on the world puts their worldview and thoughts upon(Heck, the whole basis of "Stumbling on Happiness" is this.) They just act in the background for most people, in subtle ways that they don't recognise. They are much more "logical" and "bigger picture" than logic itself, because with feelings(and a bit practice, understanding and EQ) you actually take more info into consideration, because with pure "logical and rational" decisions, you are effectively dismissing the invisible to the human eye part of things.

I am unsure of what you meant by your last paragraph. What feelings it cultivates is as(or more) important than what you do. Also, I think it is a fantastic thing that we are able to love and feel such emotions.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think you respectable few on the subject.

When we think about it, why is it that fluid transfer evokes all these feelings in our mates?

I don't know that something can be more than logic itself. But for me, I think all the romance stuff as fantasy, from that stand point i can do it. It's like any fantasy adults hold, parties, holidays, movies, etc. We need those cause life is pretty boring.

Love is like that too. Waking in front of your mate everyday, doing the basic stuff it's, even fucking from time gets old. But when you add the fantasy into it, maybe even live that fantasy from time to time :costumes, romantic dinner, a note, etc. it's makes it that much better.

Love is the path we take to join ourselves to our mate. That's the only real part, but it's part fantasy, and part mundane. Your personality will define the mixture.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

'Gaming' can be a part of preparation and learning (fair enough), but I am not of the opinion that it is a healthy aspect of it.

I could agree with that. I truly believe you can be too alpha in a relationship, but not in the initial.

It's even in the name 'Game'. Relationships aren't a 'game' that you get to play without consequences. Your 'game' involves real people and real feelings. I do not support the manipulation that TRP encourages with things as dread game and negging. Those are horrible tactics for a healthy relationship.

I think this is all a matter of how it's done. I think you got be able tease your mate, and dread game is cool when't necessary. But those are only moments. Then nitty gritty has to be all the non gaming relationship stuff.

If your gaming strategies treat the other person with the same amount of respect as you use for yourself, I have no problem with it. But that's not the impression that I get from most TRP-commenters that mention 'gaming'.

I think respect goes a long way. However, the problem is guys are expected "respect" their women with women don't feel loved, so they act in ways of disrespect. That's a sticky point. How much disrespect should a guy actually take? Or if my woman's acting disrespectfully what do I do? TRP has answers, but not all of them. This is tough part relationships in general.

[–]shw3nn 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]redwhiskeredbubul8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago* (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]glasswings0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -14 points-13 points-12 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]redwhiskeredbubul30 points31 points32 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -13 points-12 points-11 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]redwhiskeredbubul18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]redwhiskeredbubul10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]redwhiskeredbubul12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]twentyfoursevensex17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -9 points-8 points-7 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]twentyfoursevensex13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -9 points-8 points-7 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]twentyfoursevensex11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mr_frobBlue Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Have you ever had sex?

And I mean that honestly.

Because if you think technique is irrelevant I have some bad news for you man. A lot of people in your life, if you have actually ever touched a vagina, have been faking. And faking a lot.

I would point out that quite a lot of woman cannot actually orgasm purely through PIV. I would point out that everyone is different and wired in different ways (Some people fucking love nipple play, some people don't) but that is all sex blog stuff and not really the kind of thing needed within purple pill debate.

However, You really are clueless friend. Mental connections and emotions do matter, true. But alone they are not everything.

If you want to have sex, lots of sex, and you want that sex to be good, you gotta learn how to please people. And you cannot do that if you just go "I AM ALPHA AND MY COCK IS WONDERFUL." because no matter how hard you believe that.

You will leave people bored and unsatisfied.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mr_frobBlue Pill Man4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Firstly, women are not objects, nor are they possessions.

Secondly, You are incorrect. Hell, there was even an AMA on the front fucking page recently about people who orgasm during sexual assaults, including children.

So no. Your mind doesn't have to be open to the idea. It certainly helps though.

And yes. Humans can eroticise any part of their body. They can eroticise anything. People end up with weird fetishes, everyone has their own erogenous zones.

All of that aside, I do not think you are welcome here in purple pill debate. If you want to dickswing about how successful you are whilst showing incredible naivety, there is a place for that.

Its called TRP.

This is a place for debates. And I make that distinction clear. For this is not a debate. Within a debate there are two differing opinions.

Here there is a fact, or a sequence of facts (Many woman cannot orgasm solely through PIV. The mind does not have to be willing for a physiological reaction. The mind being willing is not, alone, enough, although it does help. Technique does matter.) which you dispute based on absolutely nothing.

See the difference?

Arguing whether or not Obamacare is a decent and cost effective healthcare system when compared to other nationalised systems = Debate.

Claiming that technique does not matter with regards to pleasing someone sexually = Idiocy.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Firstly, women are not objects, nor are they possessions.

They are when rules are followed.

Secondly, You are incorrect. Hell, there was even an AMA on the front fucking page recently about people who orgasm during sexual assaults, including children.

Cool study more

So no. Your mind doesn't have to be open to the idea. It certainly helps though

You're talking a physical reaction. Mentally this can be stopped.

All of that aside, I do not think you are welcome here in purple pill debate. If you want to dickswing about how successful you are whilst showing incredible naivety, there is a place for that.

I don't want to talk about sex, you did. That's you that wants to argue.

This is a place for debates. And I make that distinction clear. For this is not a debate. Within a debate there are two differing opinions.

If you read the post, we're debating: TRP, Love, romance, manipulation, etc.

Here there is a fact, or a sequence of facts (Many woman cannot orgasm solely through PIV. The mind does not have to be willing for a physiological reaction. The mind being willing is not, alone, enough, although it does help. Technique does matter.) which you dispute based on absolutely nothing.

I know what i'm talking about, and i'm not going to argue. I'm glad you have this information.

Arguing whether or not Obamacare is a decent and cost effective healthcare system when compared to other nationalised systems = Debate.

Patronizing is cool. But you're the one the off topic.

Claiming that technique does not matter with regards to pleasing someone sexually = Idiocy.

Well I pleasure women, so I know. Like I said if you want to test me, give me your woman. Otherwise I have nothing to say about sexual subject except that being alpha is great conduit for sexual pleasure, because of the mental component of sex.

This is an open invitation for you. .

[–]mikewise2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (67 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (66 children) | Copy Link

[–]shw3nn 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

What you did here was come up with some rationalization for some types of slight sexism and how they might benefit you in seducing women.

Let's talk about reals, not feels. Let's go take a look at what is happening right this second at the tippity toopity top of TRP.

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1w720i/guys_only_like_me_for_my_pussy/

Somebody asks a question about what is going on when women complain men are only interested in them for sex. Right out of the gate, the topic is women doing something unappealing, whinging. You won't get to the top of TRP talking about something women do that people like.

No, if you want TRP on board, you have to talk about something annoying that women do.

Top answer: Quote of movie character telling a woman people are only interested in her for sex because she has a bad personality. Much agreement, love of the quote.

Second top answer: Guy talking about how his wife said that but didn't even have sex with him. Responses about how women are not logical.

Third: Patrice O'Neal quote about how some women maybe don't have anything but pussy to offer. Responses, yeah, women have nothign else to offer, and another movie quote about how women lack reason and accountability.

This is all happening on a board that teaches men how to get pussy from women. A conversation about why women suck for thinking men just want pussy.

This is why people think poorly of you guys.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

What you did here was come up with some rationalization for some types of slight sexism and how they might benefit you in seducing women.

They also benefit in dealing with relationships. If you're man doesn't know how to treat a woman like "a woman". He'll lose. There must be some sexism in relationships, you can't be truly equal and then act accordingly. It defies logic to think another way.

I think you're a woman, so I'm sure you know women that have terrible attitudes but are also insanely hot. Plus, a lot women go through this, that's why there is red pill women btw.

I personally believe that pussy is the most powerful thing that a woman has in a relationship. She may even have a great personality, and all good things. But at the end of the day, in a relationship pussy is the Coup de Gras, or trump card. Women use it as such. I think all women do this to varying degrees, some are malicious and some are playful. And in a relationship, if you don't know how praise the pussy, no matter how alpha you are, you will lose your woman.

Women are illogical, because they do things by feel. Surely, a women choose to love someone be with someone. But primarily, their actions are governed by feelings, not hard logic. Guys are more logical, in general. So guys must learn how to deal with that. A better quote from As Good As it Gets. How do you write women so well?

Why does this thread give TRP a bad name? Can you spell it out for me?

[–]shw3nn 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure you know women that have terrible attitudes but are also insanely hot.

Yeah. I also think TRP is an entire subreddit of men who have terrible attitudes.

Women are illogical, because they do things by feel. Surely, a women choose to love someone be with someone. But primarily, their actions are governed by feelings, not hard logic. Guys are more logical, in general. So guys must learn how to deal with that.

No. Maybe men tend to be a little bit better at logic than women. That is possible.

But it is not true that men tend to be logical and women tend to be driven by emotion.

I was teaching myself from a 3rd grade math book in 1st grade. I have never tested below the 95th percentile in any standardized test of math and logic ability, including a professionally administered IQ test when I was about 8 years old.

When a guy thinks men are logical and women are not, he tends to be compltely incapable of noticing my own innate abilities at logic. Because guys who think that tend to believe that logic is just anything they think. And other people's opinions are illogical.

People who think men are logical and women are emotion driven never seem to even really understand what logic is.

You are completley wrong about this. Men are not noticeably more dispassionate, rational and logical than women. Trust me.

Why does this thread give TRP a bad name? Can you spell it out for me?

Because it is a big bitch and moan and complain about women session. It has no point, no end. It's just whinging and being mean and unfair about women. And that is basically the function that subreddit serves.

You may think it is logic. But, no, that isn't what logic is.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. I also think TRP is an entire subreddit of men who have terrible attitudes.

:)

I was teaching myself from a 3rd grade math book in 1st grade. I have never tested below the 95th percentile in any standardized test of math and logic ability, including a professionally administered IQ test when I was about 8 years old.

IQ doesn't mean anything, in the real world, or relationships. If you're a math person you do know that women disappear in high level math.

I'm not saying anything about women's practical abilities, I just in mean in relationships.

When a guy thinks men are logical and women are not, he tends to be compltely incapable of noticing my own innate abilities at logic. Because guys who think that tend to believe that logic is just anything they think. And other people's opinions are illogical.

I don't know about incapable, but you're right this can happen.

You are completely wrong about this. Men are not noticeably more dispassionate, rational and logical than women. Trust me.

If you try think that a woman's reactions are logical you will gain many challenges For example, you can be the most amazing bf for years, maybe even husband. But you fuck up royally one time, and it's like you were the worst person in history of bf. Now, she may recoil or ponder this, but this is typical of women. A guy fucks once, and it's like he fucked up their whole relationship.

Or why do rings have to be so expensive for weddings?

Why don't you give an example of your point?

Because it is a big bitch and moan and complain about women session.

100% right!

It has no point, no end. It's just whinging and being mean and unfair about women. And that is basically the function that subreddit serves.

There isn't' an end, and I agree with you also it's whole "let's hug and comfort each other sessions" haha I don't' why you don't' like that? shouldn't men have a support session?

You may think it is logic. But, no, that isn't what logic is.

There's logic behind it. There have been a tremendous amount of works on the interactions of feminine, and masculine traits. TRP espouses some of these ideas. The problem is it's too difficult to know how much feminine or masculine is in any given person.

[–]shw3nn 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

IQ doesn't mean anything, in the real world, or relationships.

This is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about. I am a woman and you seem to have a visceral reluctance to see me as a person who excels at logic. You can't stop yourself from trying to dismiss or minimize my positive qualities.

Your opinion about women and logic is based on emotion. That's why you needed to try to knock me down a bit there. It was a pointless thing to do except that you wanted to do it. Because you dislike the idea that I might be better at logic than you.

You wont' be able to see it but it's like a neon sign to me.

If you're a math person you do know that women disappear in high level math.

No, we don't. But even if that were true, it doesn't disagree with my point.

I'm not saying anything about women's practical abilities, I just in mean in relationships.

Well, I've dated a lot of men and you guys aren't Data in relationships. At all.

If you try think that a woman's reactions are logical you will gain many challenges

If you try to think that anybody's reactions in matters of love and relationships will be logical, you will face many challenges. Most people in general do not act logically or rationally. It's weird that I even have to point that out to you.

Or why do rings have to be so expensive for weddings?

Status. The way a guy with a shitload of money will buy a Lamborghini and never take it over 60 mph.

People act like idiots about 99% of the time.

There's logic behind it. There have been a tremendous amount of works on the interactions of feminine, and masculine traits. TRP espouses some of these ideas. The problem is it's too difficult to know how much feminine or masculine is in any given person.

We are talking about the conversation in that thread, remember?

[–]weirdlemonade81 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

This is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about. I am a woman and you seem to have a visceral reluctance to see me as a person who excels at logic. You can't stop yourself from trying to dismiss or minimize my positive qualities.

I'm a bad person for this. I know plenty of 160s that can barely live. I don't care if you're T,woman, man, or dog. IQ means jack shit, outside of academia.

Your opinion about women and logic is based on emotion. That's why you needed to try to knock me down a bit there. It was a pointless thing to do except that you wanted to do it. Because you dislike the idea that I might be better at logic than you.

Nah you may very will be. I don't have problem with that. If we were having sex, i'm not so sure your logic skils would help the relationship.

No, we don't. But even if that were true, it doesn't disagree with my point.

Seriously this is true actually. Do you many female quants? This is not what i'm talking about though.

Well, I've dated a lot of men and you guys aren't Data in relationships. At all.

I'd love to hear about it.

If you try to think that anybody's reactions in matters of love and relationships will be logical, you will face many challenges. Most people in general do not act logically or rationally. It's weird that I even have to point that out to you.

Ok so you agree with me? Or I don't' get where you're coming from?

Status. The way a guy with a shitload of money will buy a Lamborghini and never take it over 60 mph. People act like idiots about 99% of the time.

Actually that's not the reason. The reason is because a wedding/marriage is specific to a woman. A wedding ring, and wedding denotes her worth, in a crude way her pussy or her life. This is verifiable in history and cultures around the world. It's very specific.

But I agree people do act like idiots, i'm not sure about 99%, but yeah.

We are talking about the conversation in that thread, remember?

Yep.

I think you have problem with approach. You don't like men think that women are illogical, and they should take time care emotions before they act. Unfortunately, men usually think the opposite they assume logic from their woman, and they are confused. That is what that post is about. So a man should assume emotional basis for actions, then act appropriately.

[–]shw3nn 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

I know plenty of 160s that can barely live. I don't care if you're T,woman, man, or dog. IQ means jack shit, outside of academia.

I did not say what my IQ was. I gave a list of reasons why I know I excel at logic.

Your opinion about IQ is a non sequitur but I think I know why you offered it.

Do you many female quants?

I don't know any quants. The only topologist I know is female, I met her at a party. Many of my math professors were women.

I'd love to hear about it.

Start a thread asking the women here to tell you about the most irrational, illogical stuff men they dated did. The world is your oyster. I don't feel like hating on men.

A wedding ring, and wedding denotes her worth

And you think this is completely different from buying a car to denote your worth?

I do not.

I think you have problem with approach.

I think you have a problem reading that thread. It is just guys saying insulting things about women.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

I did not say what my IQ was. I gave a list of reasons why I know I excel at logic. Your opinion about IQ is a non sequitur but I think I know why you offered it.

I'm baffled by this response. IQ doesn't measure your ability to be logical I the real world, that is a terrible fallacy.

You already agree that matters of the heart tend to be illogical in nature. So I think separated ourselves from academic intelligence argument.

I don't know any quants. The only topologist I know is female, I met her at a party. Many of my math professors were women.

Talk to your math professors about women in high level math, or physics. They are fields dominated by men. It has nothing to do with the practical abilities of women.

Start a thread asking the women here to tell you about the most irrational, illogical stuff men they dated did. The world is your oyster. I don't feel like hating on men.

Why don't you start it?

And you think this is completely different from buying a car to denote your worth? I do not.

This is very technical. It's just historical. The whole wedding ritual is based around this idea. A wedding is also akin to the death of a woman as bachelorette. Unfortunately, a car does not do that for man.

I think you have a problem reading that thread. It is just guys saying insulting things about women.

You're not following where the insults are coming from, but I'm sure that's because you're a woman. So it maybe hard to do cause it's about your sister, but not because of your logic capabilities. Just like hard for man to hear the same thing from women. I don't blame you.

[–]shw3nn5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm baffled by this response. IQ doesn't measure your ability to be logical I the real world, that is a terrible fallacy.

This is exactly what I was talking about before. IQ does measure your ability to be logical. Being logical in the real world isn't a different skill from being logical on an IQ test. The problem is that being logical does not help you in the real world because the world doesn't run on logic. Most people aren't logical.

What you are calling, "being logical in the real world," isn't logic at all. It's just the way you think. If you think a certain way, you call that logical. If other people think a different way, you call that illogical. At no point in this are you ever actually talking about logic.

Talk to your math professors about women in high level math, or physics

You mean the math professor who ARE women in high level math or physics?

Why don't you start it?

Because I know how illogical men are in relationships. I don't need to ask anybody about it.

Unfortunately, a car does not do that for man.

The point is that the two are similar. If a man can want a ridiculously expensive car he doesn't even want to use, woman can want a big, expensive ring that has no real use.

You're not following where the insults are coming from

Why would I care? I am just saying that that is what TRP is, it's guys insulting women. If you just sit around insulting other people, nobody will think well of you.

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This is exactly what I was talking about before. IQ does measure your ability to be logical. Being logical in the real world isn't a different skill from being logical on an IQ test. The problem is that being logical does not help you in the real world because the world doesn't run on logic. Most people aren't logical.

IQ only shows how people logical in context of academia. There are no tests practical intelligence. (You can research difference between academic and practical intelligence if you want o be clear.) If there were we'd have the Brave New World.

IQ test are quite meaningless and low level can be gamed anyway. Except in academia. It also doesn't prove that you logical deal with a partner after having amazing sex with them.

What you are calling, "being logical in the real world," isn't logic at all. It's just the way you think. If you think a certain way, you call that logical. If other people think a different way, you call that illogical. At no point in this are you ever actually talking about logic.

I'm actually about talking difference emotional logic, and hard logic. People tend think emotional logic is illogical, and hard logic is logical. TRP is no different. And you cant' really find the logic in emotions, especially in are relationship, cause you can't know whether the emotions are coming from. So it's easier to assume that their illogical and based on emotions. And then act accordingly.

You mean the math professor who ARE women in high level math or physics?

Sure there are some for sure. They will tell you about hard it is.

The point is that the two are similar. If a man can want a ridiculously expensive car he doesn't even want to use, woman can want a big, expensive ring that has no real use.

The wedding ring is a symbol, and for the ritual it has a huge use. It is extremely important, and nothing like a car. The point is a wedding ring is ritualistic.

Why would I care? I am just saying that that is what TRP is, it's guys insulting women. If you just sit around insulting other people, nobody will think well of you.

Can't argue with that really. Why should you care? I can't answer that's, up to you.

[–]shw3nn5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There is a dichotomy between at least two types of intelligence. You should read more about it's pretty fascinating.

Your point isn't proven because no one can apply IQ test to show how well you'll logically deal in a relationship. Your s illogical. I don't' think you can prove by using something that known to be illogical?

I think it would be great if we could do that. Have our mates take a test and see how logical they'll be in a relationship.

When I say logic in a relationship, I'm specifically talking about the logic of an action. If we were to trace the thought of why someone would do something, I could find a logical basis for everything. That doesn't end in " I felt it was right."

In general, you can do this for men, but not for women. That's what I mean. That's only when we're talking about typical gender roles, cause if we talk about sex, that's a different story. TRP works on this idea that women use "It felt right", as reasoning for action. And because emotions do not necessarily have a verifiable logical basis, then that's why it is thought that women are illogical, in general. Another way to think of this is that women are more likely to do what feels right, rather than what is "right".

[–]shw3nn6 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]shw3nn3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]shw3nn2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You said men aren't logic, and you dated a bunch non logical men. It seems you're really talking IQ and logic.

I am not. Look at this statement you made:

If we were to trace the thought of why someone would do something, I could find a logical basis for everything. That doesn't end in " I felt it was right."

This is not the case. In a relationship, you are going to do most of what you do because it feels right to you. That will actually be your reasons for taking various actions you take.

You may or may not be able to manufacture some logical sounding reasons for your behaviour but I could do that with any given woman's behavior, too. You will tell yourself that all of your actions are sound logical decisions because you want your own needs met and you want to be able to do what you want to do. You want to be taken seriously. So you describe your reasons as logical but that is a lie.

You, apparently, don't want to meet women's needs or let them do what thay want or take them seriously. So you decline to manufacture logical sounding reasons for their behavior and dismiss them as illogical.

But you are exactly as illogical as whatever woman you are thinking of.

[–]masterrod0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This is not the case. In a relationship, you are going to do most of what you do because it feels right to you. That will actually be your reasons for taking various actions you take.

This is typical woman thought. And because women are more emotional, in general, a man has understand that. If the woman is acting in a way that's consistent with keeping the relationship intact, he has adjust behavior, or leave.

You may or may not be able to manufacture some logical sounding reasons for your behavior but I could do that with any given woman's behavior, too. You will tell yourself that all of your actions are sound logical decisions because you want your own needs met and you want to be able to do what you want to do. You want to be taken seriously. So you describe your reasons as logical but that is a lie.

I don't know about this is actually true.

You, apparently, don't want to meet women's needs or let them do what thay want or take them seriously. So you decline to manufacture logical sounding reasons for their behavior and dismiss them as illogical.

On the contrary, I like meeting needs but I like mine met too. I also know that in relationships over time it's important to learn how to adjust your behavior, because there is a point where love is not enough. And behavior must curtailed for the relationship to continue. And sometimes your instincts aren't correct.

The most sinister part of relationships is that someone can give a list of why they do things, but that still doesn't engender love.

Loving a woman is about trying, failing, and success, but it is a also reflection on ones self. If man fails to understand that his woman do things just because she feels them, he's lost. That's' why TRP exists, but it's part of the battle, although they claim supremacy.

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You wouldn't write that women are illogical, but do you still think that?

You write that women are emotional instead. But it's not really a nice way of saying it if you mean that women are illogical.

Why not "humans" are emotional. "Humans" are illogical.

Our society unfortunately frowns upon males expressing emotion, it doesn't mean they're not emotional. Furthermore, there are certain emotions that are "acceptable" for men to express that women are not encouraged to express, and vice versa.

This doesn't mean that women are emotional at the expense of being logical, or that men are logical at the expense of being emotional. That's the sexism. It's harmful because you're robbing both genders of part of their humanity.

As for sexism needed to initiate relationships- again, that's your personal preference.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think you want to maintain individuality, as being human. I think disingenuous. Because of identify as a woman, you are subject to certain expectations.

When I say women i'm referring to typical gender roles, I don't mean that all humans with vaginas act in a certain way. This particular point has been dis-proven, and also proven useless for the sake of certain types studies. Men and woman, can act like each other or vice versa.

I say sexism, because that's what is. But you could also say expectations. In every relationship, we have expectations from our partners. Usually, these expectations are sexist because they have to be,and because it takes a while to know someone.

The reason why TRP talks alpha so much, is because women get hit on a lot, and they use a lot "sexist" way of sorting men. So if one doesn't get past the auto response, he's dead in the water. In the beginning, and in a relationship, not getting passed her initial sexist response, or living up to her expectation, will force her toward her negative learned behavior.

This doesn't mean that women are emotional at the expense of being logical, or that men are logical at the expense of being emotional. That's the sexism. It's harmful because you're robbing both genders of part of their humanity.

If a man doesn't realize this his woman is likely to have emotions as her priority in a relationship, he's lost. Women have tested to be more emotionally intelligent than men. Also, it is known that most women feel things much deeper than men. The man may not even understand from his perspective so they are illogical, but he must recognize them regardless and act accordingly.

As for sexism needed to initiate relationships- again, that's your personal preference.

The problem even though I know that sexes can act like each other. I don't have ability to have experience with a statistically large group to say "everyone is equal". We also don't live in an egalitarian culture, so one would have have no idea what things she may hold dear, or not. I do know that archetypal patterns are passed down historically. I also know when I'm with women past the initial sexist expectations, I still have learn that particular person. At that point, expectations can become more personal.

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think part of where we disagree here is by assigning characteristics to genders. You're saying that male and female can act like each other. In this case, a man being emotional is acting like a woman and a woman being logical is acting like a man.

That's just not true. Women cry more in front of people because it's more socially acceptable for them to do so. Men repress it because it's not. This doesn't mean a lack of logical behavior in one gender, or an increase in logical behavior in another. It doesn't mean that being logical is a male characteristic.

Being emotional doesn't have anything to do with being female. Men get angry, sad, they feel pride, humiliation, envy, resentment, love, passion, hate, fondness, they feel all these things. All the time.

Emotion has nothing female about it.

It's human.

As is the ability to reason.

With regards to expectations and sexism, well that's what gender discourse is about and breaking down roles. I don't want the guy to be expected to pay for me on a date. Women have been self-supporting for a long time now. If he offers, great. I'll get the next one. It doesn't make financial sense for the guy to pay all the time. Certainly not in this economy.

I'm not sure what else I wanted to say in this post- I also need to reread yours, I didn't completely understand the part about sexism in initiating relationships and auto-sorts. Could you give some examples?

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's human. As is the ability to reason.

What you're saying isn't wrong, it's just how useful is it. You has to start at some baseline, if you going into relationship think each person is equal, it will be tough. Better to start with some basis and calibrate as you get to know each other.

Being emotional doesn't have anything to do with being female. Men get angry, sad, they feel pride, humiliation, envy, resentment, love, passion, hate, fondness, they feel all these things. All the time. Emotion has nothing female about it.

Women tend to more sensitive than men about things, so the depth emotion can be different.

With regards to expectations and sexism, well that's what gender discourse is about and breaking down roles. I don't want the guy to be expected to pay for me on a date. Women have been self-supporting for a long time now. If he offers, great. I'll get the next one. It doesn't make financial sense for the guy to pay all the time. Certainly not in this economy.

This is a goal, but I don't think is possible nor useful. There must be start point, and it starts sex biased expectations. They don't the popular ones, but they exist nonetheless.

I'm not sure what else I wanted to say in this post- I also need to reread yours, I didn't completely understand the part about sexism in initiating relationships and auto-sorts. Could you give some examples?

Simplest is being alpha to pick up a girl. That's sex biased scenario. And it will calibrated over time with that lady, or the relationship will break. We can talk more in depth about useful sex bias if you want.

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think you can take this further and assess the conditional aspect of relationships, and say men should do this, an women should do this.. Which has been done, but we won't' do that here.

One easy example, is that it's socially acceptable for women to be caught up in the throws of passion and sleep with someone for that very reason. On men's side, it's socially acceptable for a man to bring a woman to a passionate state and sleep with her.

This "sickness" is replayed for us many times, and is at the minimum an expectation. Besides, Women in arts are usually shown as pure an innocent, when she's over taken by the passion a man provides. So it is a more ore less safe expectation of men, if they could be that exact man.

When think TRP, the idea is for a man to replay this role, that a woman has surely seen countless times in her life, so that she will act they say she's "supposed" to..

SO when we say emotion, we are talking about type of activities that a woman typically engages in. A woman typically engages in actives that require emotional sensitivity (in your words). So it is then reasonable, to think that women are "emotional". This is why why a man might call a man a sissy, or even woman when displaying high levels of emotional sensitivity. You could say emotional intelligence requires analytical ability. However, emotions do not necessarily have logical roots, so it's difficult to have analytical ability on something can barely be analyzed, and in many cases tend towards feelings. So a lot of times we say, I had a gut reaction to this person, with no logical path. Surely, men can do this and women can do this. But if we define a woman as more emotional intelligent, or at least expected to be, we would have to say it's a safe expectation. In fact, this particular realization is one that provides basis for some very effective relationship counseling. Regardless, if someone is emotionally intelligent they must be in touch with there feelings, and also have the ability to react antithetically to them. In a way, defines expected women's activity.

It's impossible to make an assumption that all women will do XYZ. It is possible however to make an assumption that an emotional intelligent person must be in-tune to their emotions, empathetic (using your words). Sense they maybe intelligent they have the ability to act antithetically to their emotions.

I think you're caught up and women as saying anything about women in general. I think it's better to focus on expected conditions. Then we can question whether a specific expectation is a reasonable expectation. Providing, simply that some woman doesn't do ex, is surely valid. However, it doesn't provide much weight. So we can always go deeper. Maybe you should define the way you see a woman, maybe with some cultural examples.

[–]weirdlemonade81 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AbracadanielleBlue Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]AbracadanielleBlue Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Isn't pussy a good thing?

Language like this is the problem. Reducing women and relationships with them down into the concept of "pussy". That is offensive to some people. It's offensive to me.

amplified pussy power

I don't even know what that means. And this is also part of the problem. TRP's whole vocabulary, phrases like "the cock carosel" and "hamstering", they're all very inherently insulting towards women.

i don't know why this is bad.

TRP is a board that claims women are only good for sex. That thread is complaining about a woman not wanting to only be good for sex, like how dare she, right? It highlights the notion, that many people try to claim isn't true in this very debate sub, that users at TRP think women are only good for sex. Women are "good" for more than sex, they are wholly functioning human beings, just like men.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

TRP is a board that claims women are only good for sex. That thread is complaining about a woman not wanting to only be good for sex, like how dare she, right? It highlights the notion, that many people try to claim isn't true in this very debate sub, that users at TRP think women are only good for sex. Women are "good" for more than sex, they are wholly functioning human beings, just like men.

Women are definitely not just like men, that's the worst thing you can believe in a relationship. That doesn't mean their less then men either.

Pussy power just relates to how a woman acts. She acts as she's holding something powerful. If it isn't praised, she will settle the score, so to speak.

I think the crass idea can be off putting. However, women do act as if the pussy is the most powerful thing. That's why it's easy for them to accept gifts in an effort for a guy to sleep with them. I'm sure you know women that do this.

If I were to ask you, if I took away your pussy, how would you be able to keep a man?

[–]AbracadanielleBlue Pill Woman6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

If I were to ask you, if I took away your pussy, how would you be able to keep a man?

I contemplated not answering this, because to me it is a ridiculous question. But for the sake of debate here's what I would say: I am not currently keeping my man with my pussy anyways, but I'd keep him around the same way I am now, out of mutual respect, shared interests, and the fact that we love each other. My fiance is my best friend. We have fun together, we have the same sense of humor, we feel strongly about the same political things. If our relationship were only about sex, it would have fizzled out years ago. There have been times in our relationship where sex wasn't possible for whatever reason, and things weren't strained. I wasn't worried about cheating. I've never been worried about cheating. I've been in a decent number of relationships at this point in my life, and I'm good at being honest with myself about what I want, and about what's realistic in a situation. We're good for each other, whether or not sex is involved. We like each other.

I also just asked my fiance if he would leave me if my vagina fell off, and he gave me a very strange look.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I also just asked my fiance if he would leave me if my vagina fell off, and he gave me a very strange look.

I'm sorry a selfie of his face would have been classic with that caption. :)

I contemplated not answering this, because to me it is a ridiculous question. But for the sake of debate here's what I would say: I am not currently keeping my man with my pussy anyways, but I'd keep him around the same way I am now, out of mutual respect, shared interests, and the fact that we love each other. My fiance is my best friend. We have fun together, we have the same sense of humor, we feel strongly about the same political things. If our relationship were only about sex, it would have fizzled out years ago. There have been times in our relationship where sex wasn't possible for whatever reason, and things weren't strained. I wasn't worried about cheating. I've never been worried about cheating. I've been in a decent number of relationships at this point in my life, and I'm good at being honest with myself about what I want, and about what's realistic in a situation. We're good for each other, whether or not sex is involved. We like each other.

It's something no one could really predict. I think you given a fair answer. You underscore an important point, that you're with him because of the way he makes you feel, and the way he acts. When you feel in love with someone, no one really wants to dissect that. I think it's wonderful.

In a practical sense, I think the inability to have sex with a mate would become very tough, and you'd constantly worry how long he would actually be with you. Because you had some power, some way of connecting with him that's different from a friend, and now it's gone.

Pussy power might mean a lot negative things, but is among most things it's the power of connection. And for many women pussy is emotionally connected directly to their hearts. Unfortunately, a man can do a lot things but if he doesn't take care of a woman's heart, even ostensibly, he won't have pussy. And if he can't learn to act in away that takes care of both her heart, and her pussy he won't have either. TRP, is a way of understanding how to behave to take care of both. Written in ways men can understand. It's only part of it, a larger journey. You should think of it as the whole thing.

[–]runswithelves1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]polyhooly2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There is absolutely no evidence that suggests women are driven by emotion and men by logic and rationality. What the evidence does say is that women have larger areas of the brain that process emotion, which seems to suggest that women have a better time at understanding their own emotions as well as the emotions of others. This does not mean that women are driven by frivolous and fleeting whims, anymore than men. As a matter if fact I believe that because women understand their emotions better, they are actually in better control of them. It is not women who shoot up a shopping mall because they're heartbroken. It is not women who shoot up their schools or workplaces because they didn't fit in. It was not a woman who put a bullet in the head of a man traveling home after Christmas because he accidently cut them off. A leading cause of death of young men is not at the hands of their female partners. Do you want to guess one of the leading causes of death of women under 30, as well as pregnant women?

And with that being said, being logical does not mean for one second your thinking is sound. I can logically argue there is an invisible fairy sitting on my shoulder. It doesn't make me right.

This whole "women are driven by emotion and men by logic" notion is nothing but an ad homonem used as an attempt to discredit both women's feelings and analysis of a situation. It is nothing but patronization, essentially reducing women to little more than sexually mature children (which is an often repeated battle cry on TRP).

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There is absolutely no evidence that suggests women are driven by emotion and men by logic and rationality. What the evidence does say is that women have larger areas of the brain that process emotion, which seems to suggest that women have a better time at understanding their own emotions as well as the emotions of others. This does not mean that women are driven by frivolous and fleeting whims, anymore than men. As a matter if fact I believe that because women understand their emotions better, they are actually in better control of them.

You're mixing sex, and gender. Sex is biological, gender is socially assigned or acted.

I never met one woman with better control of emotions than man. Ever. That's shocking. (But i don't doubt they exist)

I wouldn't get into a neurological conversation that could only mean that women use emotions logic more. Any part of brain can do any sort of thing, even our understanding of the brain is very limited right now.

And with that being said, being logical does not mean for one second your thinking is sound. I can logically argue there is an invisible fairy sitting on my shoulder. It doesn't make me right.

Funny you use that example.

This whole "women are driven by emotion and men by logic" notion is nothing but an ad homonem used as an attempt to discredit both women's feelings and analysis of a situation. It is nothing but patronization, essentially reducing women to little more than sexually mature children (which is an often repeated battle cry on TRP).

I think that's one way to think of it. Another way is to give context what woman might do. For example if a woman is cheating you after you've done a lot for her. A man could think she sucks and can't be trusted. Or he can assume that she felt it was right thing to do, because he wasn't respecting her, he wasn't talk to her enough, he was praising for what she values.

Now if we talk about females can act any way, that's not useful in a relationship. So it's best to maintain sex biased and then calibrate as you learn about your woman. That's all that can be done, I'm not sure how anyone could expect different. You might be concerned about the initial condition, but you will tend towards useless territory if you get to granular to what females/women can/will do.

That battle cry is just to keep you out of TRP.

[–]polyhooly0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're mixing sex, and gender. Sex is biological, gender is socially assigned or acted.

I know the difference between sex and gender. How do you believe I am mixing the two up?

I never met one woman with better control of emotions than man. Ever. That's shocking. (But i don't doubt they exist)

Well ok then. I guess that settles that.

Another way is to give context what woman might do. For example if a woman is cheating you after you've done a lot for her. A man could think she sucks and can't be trusted. Or he can assume that she felt it was right thing to do, because he wasn't respecting her, he wasn't talk to her enough, he was praising for what she values.

I have a friend whose husband is in banking. I was over at a party at their house about a year ago, and several of her husbands coworkers were there. One guy in particular really took a liking to me. It was clear that he is married, and so am I, but he was relentless in pursuing me. I went to the bathroom and he waited outside, trying to pull me aside to makeout with me. It was really beginning to piss me off. He was drunk, and eventually apologized for his behavior. But we did end up talking together for quite sometime. Do you know why he said he was no longer attracted to his wife? Because, and I quote "She is getting old." A successful, relatively attractive married man with three children is willing to throw that away because he wife has turned the big 4-0.

But according to you, only women make irrational, emotionally and raw animal instinct driven decisions. Men are rational, and hamstering, that is making excuses for bad behavior, is what women do. This is one reason why TRP is such a joke: You are so confident you have everything figured out, but you couldn't me any further from the mark. Your whole worldview is nothing but fallacies: confirmation bias, fundamental attribution errors, ad hominems, and strawmen.

That battle cry is just to keep you out of TRP.

Or the fact that they ban anyone who posts on TBP. But who knows, right?

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But according to you, only women make irrational, emotionally and raw animal instinct driven decisions. Men are rational, and hamstering, that is making excuses for bad behavior, is what women do. This is one reason why TRP is such a joke: You are so confident you have everything figured out, but you couldn't me any further from the mark. Your whole worldview is nothing but fallacies: confirmation bias, fundamental attribution errors, ad hominems, and strawmen

Well me and TRP. I'm rep TRP, but I know a lot more than what's there. To be fair, most people's world view is full fallacies cause we can't practically see that much of people to get real hold on things. And if we don't use fallacies we'll hesitate every move. So just not useful.

TRP is a group of initial conditions designed to help people navigate through the world. There's nothing more. They will always be massage with experience. You could disagree about the initial conditions, but then you'd offer a better one. Offering zero, isn't useful to anyone.

Or the fact that they ban anyone who posts on TBP. But who knows, right?

I know why, cause their overly protectionist. There are a lot of hurt men there.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

It's sexist to compliment a woman? No, it's not. it's sexist to say that women like praise more then men.

When women flirt, they stroke men's egos. Men like praise just as much. Everyone likes to feel good about themselves. The TRP philosophy is one giant ego stroke.

I also don't think that romance has anything to do with sexism. It's pretty sexist to say that men don't know what love/ intimacy/romance is. Maybe the men YOU know are pretty clueless. RPs don't represent a cross section of the male gender.

Thank GOD.

Besides the fact that this isn't even remotely the sexism that I'm talking about. You're dancing around the problem. The sexism that I have a problem with is the Hypergamy/women are illogical/the wall/women can't love a man the way he wants/are solipsistic/, this is disgusting sexist bullshit. This is what causes the uproar.

I could care less about "game." Women have game, men have game. So what?

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

It's sexist to compliment a woman? No, it's not. it's sexist to say that women like praise more then men.

It is but also true. We can get into the gender roles, i'm just skipping over that cause I think that's assumed. Clearly all females can't adhere to that principle, but it is typical gender role for women to like praise more than men do.

But to your point men would prefer to feel like man, than be praised. For example, a man would is more like;y to be really happy that you asked him fix something, versus praising on his bicep size. Women don't' usually work like that. One example is the "do i like look fat in this?". I'm sure you know this.. i won't belabor it..

I also don't think that romance has anything to do with sexism. It's pretty sexist to say that men don't know what love/ intimacy/romance is.

Maybe the men YOU know are pretty clueless. RPs don't represent a cross section of the male gender.

Romance is completely sexist. I'm not really sure missed that. If you're going to tell me that men respond to romance better than women, or equal, i'm going to just laugh.

A common problem in relationships is the ability for a guy understand romance, and still be manly.

I think it doesn't need to be said that RPs don't represent a cross section of male gender, that's assumed.

The sexism that I have a problem with is the Hypergamy/women are illogical/the wall/women can't love a man the way he wants/are solipsistic/, this is disgusting sexist bullshit.

This really isn't bullshit. Women are illogical, they focus more emotions than logic. Women can't love a man the way he wants because love isn't man's usual aim. Especially, an alpha. An alpha's mission is his aim, not love. Do you agree there are different types of love? Or that expectations/definitions can differ between partners? Women can be extremely selfish, but they often submit to the man that's more selfish, or a man that tells her that's she's being too selfish(this really goes both ways). In regards to Hypergamy, so you're disputing that social proof exists/or works? How would you describe women if these traits aren't valid?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

You're the first person I've talked with that said "it's sexist but it's true". Normally people say it's not sexist because it's true. You just threw me for a loop.

On RPW, they also have an interesting take on it. They say that the word "sexist" has no meaning for them. They realize that for others, their philosophy is sexist, but because they believe those things to be true, the word "sexist" doesn't mean anything in the construct of their philosophy. (I think you can read it on their FAQ, they explain it better)

That was the most honest take I've heard. Not that I agree, but at least they're not trying to have their cake and eat it too.

W/r to the sexism shitlist, the problem is that men can be all of these things too. Both genders are, and to varying degrees. Women are hypergfamous? SOME women are. And some men are. People are, because it's natural to want the next best thing, or, to want what you can't have. Women are illogical? So are men. Women are more focused on emotions? Depends on the woman. Some men are also more focused on their emotions. People can be illogical. People can be over emotional.

I also think your generalizations about men are extremely harmful, sexist, and demeaning, but for different reasons. Men know nothing of romance? All of my boyfriends have been more romantic than me. The exception is my husband. He's not a romantic. Different people like different things. You say guys know nothing of romance? Again, I'd say the guys you know are pretty clueless. That's not an insult. I'm just saying, they don't represent mankind. None of the RP stuff does.

All I can say is, thank god none of it is true. My hope is that when RPs grow up and mature a bit, they'll snap out of it.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

You're the first person I've talked with that said "it's sexist but it's true". Normally people say it's not sexist because it's true. You just threw me for a loop.

People get all thrown for a loop with this. Sexism isn't bad. We have use sexism to operate. We don't live an egalitarian culture.There are gender "truisms"(or probably outcomes), as long as the condition are constant.

W/r to the sexism shitlist, the problem is that men can be all of these things too. Both genders are, and to varying degrees. Women are hypergfamous? SOME women are. And some men are. People are, because it's natural to want the next best thing, or, to want what you can't have. Women are illogical? So are men. Women are more focused on emotions? Depends on the woman. Some men are also more focused on their emotions. People can be illogical. People can be over emotional. I also think your generalizations about men are extremely harmful, sexist, and demeaning, but for different reasons. Men know nothing of romance? All of my boyfriends have been more romantic than me. The exception is my husband. He's not a romantic. Different people like different things. You say guys know nothing of romance? Again, I'd say the guys you know are pretty clueless. That's not an insult. I'm just saying, they don't represent mankind. None of the RP stuff does.

What you're saying isn't wrong. It's true females and males in large data set act the same. But you have to understand you will never work in that type overhead view. Everyone has preconceptions of men and women gender roles, and as your in a relationship you will massage them and keep living. Some men are better a romance, some are not, etc. Some women like the demeaned, and just want to be like a prototypical woman.. So be it..

The point is that for some men they have learn it in specific way. My post was about why is it ok for men learn to be romantic vs learning sleep with women/their mate.

All I can say is, thank god none of it is true. My hope is that when RPs grow up and mature a bit, they'll snap out of it.

I'm not sure that's possible. I think as any ones grows they realize they need more skills than just being alpha. But still the alpha man can create passion in his woman.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

But why is the ultimate goal to be "alpha?" This is also why I say that when they grow up they'll snap out of it. "Alphas", as a concept, sound shallow, and very dull. They're not people. It's a stereotype in and of itself. Stereotypes aren't human.

That's really tough. The a ultimate goal isn't alpha. The ultimate goal is be able give and receive love freely. Alpha is just a path, or direction. It's just a group historical archetypes that women have found favorable for thousands of years. It's not fully explained in TRP, but that's what they're referring to.

I'm not sure if it's growing up, it's just impractical to be alpha all the time. How long is a woman going to stay around if you're constantly telling her you don't' give a fuck about her?

Ever see that movie Click with Adam Sandler. Here's a guy whom only cared about his mission and what he get? He got his wife took by a beta guy. Why? Cause he made her feel safe.

Is it fair to say that most RPs are under 25? (I hope so because a lot of them certainly sound very young and unknowledgable) People change when they grow up and have real responsibility.

I have no idea. It's fair to say there's a large portion of hurt men.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well yes. There's a difference between firebombing churches and trying to sleep with women. But you knew what I meant.

Yes, I knew what you meant. I wanted to point out their desire is to be with those that they "hate". Very different from trying to eradicate those they hate. TRP is mostly against male "injustice", and isn't terribly elegant in it's approach.

I'm not saying the concept of "alpha" doesn't exist, it's just a pretty sad way to live. I think it's a shame that this is what these guys are aiming for. You say it's not the goal, but what do you think can come after? After someone has dehumanized the other sex for so many years.

Well, human interaction is much to complex to consider every individual is a person in the actual practice, or in the moment. It just can't be done so we must take shortcuts. We can pontificate afterwards a out the individual nature of people, but that's afterwards. We can talk alpha forever, but one thing that's sneaky about relationships is that we pass on our traits to our partners. Eventually, our partners react in ways that reflect us. That's where change must happen in order to continue a relationship, or it's broken.

As I said, my hope is that they'll mature, grow up and move on. Do you think that can happen in this fictitious world they've created for themselves?

Up to the person. Growth is a very personal, some women never "grow up" and act like young women there whole lives, and men or no different.

The whole concept of alpha, and much of what TRP talks about isn't fictional, But it's wildly incomplete. I believe that's intentional. Because it keeps women out of a man cave of sorts. I do believe that there is more to life, love, and relationships than can be found in TRP. Some men and women figure that out, some don't.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Women like praise" umm everybody likes to be told nice things ? Is that weird to you ? Here's your problem though, women aren't all the same ! Tell me I'm beautiful and I honestly won't give a shit. Now tell me I'm smart and I might MIGHT give you the time of day.

Women work very differently with praise. Where men work better with challenge. For example, if a guys fucking a girl and he'd like to get her to do certain things better it's better praise her on what she's doing, rather than challenging her. Saying something like "you need to get better at doggy style." He'd be better suited to say, " I love the way you fuck me." Then he has license to coach her, once he knows she accepts the praise. A man however, will do better with challenging him. So saying to him, "oh you're so smart is ok." But saying "can you do this for me." so he can display his intelligence is much better.

When say better, I'm referring to growth in oneself, or further connecting two people together. Surely every body likes praise, that thought isn't useful in certain situations.

Has it honestly never occurred to you that you invite shallow people into your life because of the tools you use to attract these people ?

It occurs to me that everyone is shallow to some degree. And as I go through self discovery i will tend to attract my complementary opposite. But attraction is meaningless to me, i'm on the hunt. I just know my attraction level is a conduit for sexual relations, and use it as such.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I'm not explaining to you the difference between men and women. I am explaining to you the difference between women and women.

You've listed two completely different situations to illustrate how men and women react differently to the same situation.

If somebody tells me I am smart, I'm pretty sure I have proved myself to be smart beforehand. The intelligence has already been displayed. I am comfortable with my ability to display said intelligence on a daily basis because I know I am smart. If a man or women feels the need to display their intelligence all the time than they are what we call insecure.

In my experience men do not like to be challenged on their abilities in the bedroom. When they can't get women off they like to blame it on the women because they don't want to think there is anything wrong with them. If I give a guy a pointer about what could help us he brushes it off like it is my problem not his. In this situation it would be a good idea to give the guy praise before saying something negative " I love the way you fuck me, but I think trying this would really send me over the edge." That is exactly what you describe to do for a woman. So you see men and women really aren't that different in that respect.

You create the world around you. You decide who enters your life and you decide what your life will become. You know nothing about women, you know nothing about other men. You know yourself. You are not enlightened, you are not some philosopher you are a human being just like every body on this earth. One day you will die and your body will rot the same as everybody else.

You choose to attract the type of women that you believe all women are. If you choose to attract these women are you really surprised that all women in your little world are the same ? It isn't about accepting that women are one way and men are another. It's about accepting that all people are different and if you do not embody the type of person who would attract somebody you want then how in the hell can you expect to get that person ?

Learning about relationships is stupid beyond being open/honest/trustworthy because everybody wants something different. Figure out who you are and what you want from this life. Then find the person who is going to aid in bringing you that life. It's the simplest concept ever and I just don't understand how people don't get it.

I understand you find the world is a less scary and confusing place when you put people into boxes. It is a lot easier to decide how to be around women when you assume they are all one way. Women do the same thing when it comes to men. Personally I think it's all laughable.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

In my experience men do not like to be challenged on their abilities in the bedroom. When they can't get women off they like to blame it on the women because they don't want to think there is anything wrong with them. If I give a guy a pointer about what could help us he brushes it off like it is my problem not his. In this situation it would be a good idea to give the guy praise before saying something negative " I love the way you fuck me, but I think trying this would really send me over the edge." That is exactly what you describe to do for a woman. So you see men and women really aren't that different in that respect.

I described initial that's useful. However, you could opposite results. The main thing here, i'm sure agree, is that you have let a man be man, if you want him to stay. That's the point. I doubt that you have differing experience than that.

You create the world around you. You decide who enters your life and you decide what your life will become. You know nothing about women, you know nothing about other men. You know yourself. You are not enlightened, you are not some philosopher you are a human being just like every body on this earth. One day you will die and your body will rot the same as everybody else.

I don't create the world, I live in it. And I use history, people thoughts, experience to navigate through it. I can't control who comes or goes from life, I can discover things about myself and try to enrich the lives of people around me. That's all I have power over.

You choose to attract the type of women that you believe all women are. If you choose to attract these women are you really surprised that all women in your little world are the same ? It isn't about accepting that women are one way and men are another. It's about accepting that all people are different and if you do not embody the type of person who would attract somebody you want then how in the hell can you expect to get that person ?

Well unfortunately all people are not different in certain conditions. Your last question is, kind of the idea of TRP, to assume initial conditions to eliminate hesitations. When we talk about seduction, it's not about worrying what she wants, rather it's cutting through that choice, and getting to a point where you can give her a spike of masculinity, or alpha, so she forgets her preference. Cause at the end of day her preference doesn't matter, she'll make concessions, if the feeling is there and she's open to it.

Learning about relationships is stupid beyond being open/honest/trustworthy because everybody wants something different. Figure out who you are and what you want from this life. Then find the person who is going to aid in bringing you that life. It's the simplest concept ever and I just don't understand how people don't get it.

This why a lot of people breakup. They don't know where to start, when things go wrong. When they have they want, they don't always want it. Besides, getting what you want can be easy, but also hard to keep. Every one has different challenges.

I understand you find the world is a less scary and confusing place when you put people into boxes. It is a lot easier to decide how to be around women when you assume they are all one way. Women do the same thing when it comes to men. Personally I think it's all laughable.

Women box men even harder. But you got start somewhere. Well then you graduated you understand TRP. :)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I will put it nicely to a guy because I don't want to damage his ego. If I was into women I would do the same. If he still doesn't understand what a clit is and how to work it then I'm going to be a little more forward. If he still can't get it ? Sorry I was looking for somebody who cared about my pleasure not just his own ego. You have to actually be a attentive lover if you want a person to stick around.

I create my own world by the people I attract. If I smoke crack and live among people who also do then I will have a much different perception on reality from somebody who goes to college and lives a typical lifestyle.

All people are different, I couldn't even go to TRP and find two people who agree with each other on all aspects. Not only are you all one gender and should therefore be all the same but you even follow the same ideology. Yet you are still all different, funny how that works. I have my preferences, I know what life I want and if somebody isn't going to aid in me achieving that lifestyle than they aren't going to be in my life. Simple as that. No level of "manliness" will convince me otherwise.

I do not think of all women as being one way or all men of being one way in the slightest. I think it is sad and pathetic to think of the world that way. People like to box other people up into their easy to follow ways because it makes the world a simpler place. You agree that is what TRP does and I tell you I am above that.

I might understand the TRP, that does not mean I respect it. In fact I think it is beneath me.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I will put it nicely to a guy because I don't want to damage his ego. If I was into women I would do the same. If he still doesn't understand what a clit is and how to work it then I'm going to be a little more forward. If he still can't get it ? Sorry I was looking for somebody who cared about my pleasure not just his own ego. You have to actually be a attentive lover if you want a person to stick around.

You sound like you're in control of every relationship. SO I doubt you'd date an alpha. So be it. At any rate, it's important to treat a man like man. Otherwise it's just one way relationship.

I create my own world by the people I attract. If I smoke crack and live among people who also do then I will have a much different perception on reality from somebody who goes to college and lives a typical lifestyle

This is really impossible. You can only control you. This solipsism at it's finest.

All people are different, I couldn't even go to TRP and find two people who agree with each other on all aspects. Not only are you all one gender and should therefore be all the same but you even follow the same ideology. Yet you are still all different, funny how that works. I have my preferences, I know what life I want and if somebody isn't going to aid in me achieving that lifestyle than they aren't going to be in my life. Simple as that. No level of "manliness" will convince me otherwise.

They aren't really all the different if you learn enough. It's kind of sad in one way, but that's an ancillary point. Well gender roles are fluid, which is an important concept of feminism. It's funny you say, "I know what life I want and if somebody isn't going to aid in me achieving that lifestyle than they aren't going to be in my life." cause this an exact reason why people TRP talk poorly about women. Just how you phrased it. You want people to adhere to your vision of what your life. That's completely utterly selfish. And you don't want someone in your life who isn't helping you. There's no together in anything that you say.

I might understand the TRP, that does not mean I respect it. In fact I think it is beneath me.

Unfortunately it isn't, you live in the same world I live in. TRP is based on human history. At least you understand it.

In all the time I've been PPD. You're the first woman literately describes a reasoning why TRP feels the way they do about women.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm actually the complete opposite of what you describe. I am naturally submissive in a relationship. What I am telling you is every women is not like me. Not every man wants me and I don't want every man.

Me wanting to sleep with a guy who knows how to get me off is controlling ? Do you have any idea what that tells me about how the men in TRP are in bed. I think I will steer clear.

No it isn't, I am not all that exists I simply make everyday choices that affect my life. The choices you make affect the life you will have. I know it's a crazy idea to have some accountability when your life goes a certain way but it's also pretty healthy.

You only choose to look at how one part of civilization worked. Believe me there are others and if you open your mind up a bit you may see how they differ greatly from our western version.

I want someone with a similar vision to mine. I am under not circumstances going to pick a guy and try to mould him into the man I want. That is a waste of my time. He helps me by being what I want in a man and I help him by being what he wants. He gives me what I need and I give him what he needs. It is you definition of what the sexes need that I disagree with.

It is based on somebodies narrow minded idea of history. The history of civilization is significantly more vast then you choose to accept.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I'm actually the complete opposite of what you describe. I am naturally submissive in a relationship. What I am telling you is every women is not like me. Not every man wants me and I don't want every man.

I'm sure you are, no one could summed up in a few sentences. But those particularly are why, TRP exist.

Me wanting to sleep with a guy who knows how to get me off is controlling ? Do you have any idea what that tells me about how the men in TRP are in bed. I think I will steer clear.

Your description in your last post is just one sided, that's all I'm pointing out. TRP exist because some men in relationship scan't balance it, or don't' know how. Nothing wrong with liking sex, but there is wrong if it's a one way scenario. That's not really a relationship then.

No it isn't, I am not all that exists I simply make everyday choices that affect my life. The choices you make affect the life you will have. I know it's a crazy idea to have some accountability when your life goes a certain way but it's also pretty healthy

You're right. I just mean that's all you can control is you. People will pop in your life, and leave without any reason for anything that you've done. I agree responsibility is healthy. Women don't always espouse this view.

You only choose to look at how one part of civilization worked. Believe me there are others and if you open your mind up a bit you may see how they differ greatly from our western version.

Well i can talk easy as well, but we are primarily western here. The history of western love is defined, pretty well through archetypes, thus the prevalence of alpha in seduction culture. If we talk east alpha is more defined, and even more concrete certain, even god like in some cultures. But love however, is very different thing. The spirituality of love is very richer in the east. A little more beautiful depending on whom you read.

I want someone with a similar vision to mine. I am under not circumstances going to pick a guy and try to mould him into the man I want. That is a waste of my time. He helps me by being what I want in a man and I help him by being what he wants. He gives me what I need and I give him what he needs. It is you definition of what the sexes need that I disagree with.

I see. I don't think that's bad way to be.. You think a definition of sexes should be more equal? Or you think it's too harsh?

It is based on somebodies narrow minded idea of history. The history of civilization is significantly more vast then you choose to accept.

I think a total picture is very good. We mostly talk about TRP because it's here. TRP is pretty narrow in effectiveness, and over all thought. I think it's valid as long the target are group is small acceptable.

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think it's to descriptive. You can say there is a feminine type and you can say there is a masculine type. What is silly is using them to define people 100%. People can be parts of both. I want to have kids and make my husband a hot supper after he comes home from work in the winter. I also used to drive a forklift and have been considering a career in the trades. I don't have to pick one I just have to be open and honest with the people I am in or would like to be in relationships with. We have to want the same thing, because like it or not we are going to get the same thing. Even this doesn't have to be 100% defined. Compromises will be made by both parties and that's just life.

I think this all holds some merit in the theoretical world of discussion and debate but simply has little barring on real life situations. You just don't know enough about a person to tell them who they should be.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Maybe if that was pointed out more people wouldn't have such bad views on the subject and maybe you guys wouldn't have such terrible extremists over there. Men are allowed to be a mix just like women are. Men don't have to dominate and not show emotions in a relationship. I've dated guys were I wanted nothing more then for them for be comfortable opening up to me and I could not get through to them. Things got distant and ended because of it.

There is power in both roles. To say that a relationship needs a healthy mix of both is not a terrible thing to say. If you are both passive in all aspects nobody will ask for what they want. If you are both dominate in every way you will butt heads. These are things couples can work through if they choose and might even make them stronger . Sometimes the silence just screws everything up. Opposites attract for a reason. I can be 60% passive and 40% dominate though.

If you want to preach something in a relationship preach knowing yourself before you decide who your partner should be. Otherwise it might just so happen those people aren't very compatible.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]chryseaBlue Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]chryseaBlue Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Not sure what you mean by "archetypal human history."

Means that it's possible to define human history of relationship through archetypes. And so when we look into history we can see similarities between now and the past.

I can see why people think the alpha concept is useful to refer to since obviously certain people dominate certain situations more than others, but it is not an absolute, nor is it a very perceptive way of looking at leadership, most of the time. It's also based on flawed rationale: "alphas" don't exist in the animal kingdom the way that TRP tends to assume they do. There are no actual alpha wolves, for instance.

They aren't really talking the animal alpha directly. They are referring to masculinity and femininity as individual archetypes, and how they relate to each other as humans. The rationale is flawed, but the practice isn't based on this rationale. The animals is just an ancillary point it illustrate primal behavioral patterns, it has no consequence. I think this is done in initially, cause it takes a lot to boil down the way this is done for humans, and it's very complicated. For example, there are supposedly 17 male archetypes. Talking about all of them would dilute TRP, and make it less effective. I think you have to think TRP as a reductionist theory, and puroposley incomplete.

[–]chryseaBlue Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Means that it's possible to define human history of relationship through archetypes.

What do you mean? Are you referring to specific professional historians? What evidence do they use to justify seeing history this way? I'm quite intimately familiar with Carl Jung, and I believe he has his uses, but science he is most assuredly not, and he is absolutely not a historian. Perhaps I'm not familiar with some thinkers you're implicitly referencing?

Carl Jung is basically applied mysticism. He's just not a good candidate for developing an entire philosophy around.

They are referring to masculinity and femininity as individual archetypes, and how they relate to each other as humans.

Well, you're admitting this, but: the problem with the archetype idea is that it is essentially a very generalizing form of pattern recognition. I'm sure you're aware that conceptualizations of masculinity and femininity vary in tremendous, often fundamental, ways across the globe, currently and in the past. Archetypes can be Procrustean, is what I'm saying.

The animals is just an ancillary point it illustrate primal behavioral patterns, it has no consequence.

Primal behavior patterns, if they exist the way you are assuming they do, certainly able to be studied scientifically. What peer-reviewed material do they have to back up their particular ideas about primal behavior? Evoking "archetypes" is one thing, particularly with full acknowledgment of the cultural forces at play in how they are perceived. I mean, I do it myself from time to time. But directly linking them to "primal behavior patterns" is a huge leap.

For example, there are supposedly 17 male archetypes. Talking about all of them would dilute TRP, and make it less effective. I think you have to think TRP as a reductionist theory, and puroposley incomplete.

In that we agree. If TRP limited itself in that way, I may not have such a big problem with it. The problem is, they usually don't.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

What do you mean? Are you referring to specific professional historians? What evidence do they use to justify seeing history this way? I'm quite intimately familiar with Carl Jung, and I believe he has his uses, but science he is most assuredly not, and he is absolutely not a historian. Perhaps I'm not familiar with some thinkers you're implicitly referencing? Carl Jung is basically applied mysticism. He's just not a good candidate for developing an entire philosophy around. They are referring to masculinity and femininity as individual archetypes, and how they relate to each other as

It's hard to talk Carl Jung as mysticism, because he had falling out with Freud, and thus is kind shunned. There are a lot of people that talk about archetypes. Carl Jung isn't necessarily "scientific", and archetypal thinking isn't either. There isn't any true scientific theory that defines gender roles. In order to be scientific experiments would have to be verifiable and repeatable, which is kind of impossible. I think if you really wanted a true gender theory, you'd have to look at multiple disciplines. It would be like string theory for humans, but I think there's an ethical problem with creating a true theory like that. So at best we have approximations. TRP is designed to prepare it's followers for certain situations, and recommends certain behaviors. It isn't rigorous, even though TRP seems to think so.

There are sociologist that run statistical test on groups of people. And what they find is that sexes can act like opposites sexes. A lot psychologist also assume the same thing, that there isn't any difference between the psychology of men and women. But they do agree that people have independent expectations of their mates, that inherently sexist in nature. That's one favoring factor of TRP, provide conditions are set, which TRP does a crude job of doing. No regular person operate from the top end, when their in the relationship, it's just impractical.

Which books of Carl jung have you read? Do read any jungist?

Primal behavior patterns, if they exist the way you are assuming they do, certainly able to be studied scientifically. What peer-reviewed material do they have to back up their particular ideas about primal behavior? Evoking "archetypes" is one thing, particularly with full acknowledgment of the cultural forces at play in how they are perceived. I mean, I do it myself from time to time. But directly linking them to "primal behavior patterns" is a huge leap.

Amy Cudy does some work on this. I don't know that there's hardcore theory about primal behavior patterns across the animal kingdom. But in TRP primal is mean to be purely sexual, or passionate behavior from a woman, animal like sexual behavior. The assumption is that if a man is alpha enough, he can evoke sexually ingrained patterns in his woman, and if he's not he can't. That's surely not scientific, that's just sorting properly to fit the method. I think in picking up women, and even in relationships it's important to have a method or experience so can get past your inevitable small failures.

In that we agree. If TRP limited itself in that way, I may not have such a big problem with it. The problem is, they usually don't.

They do limit themselves. But they say they don't. It's kind of humorous in a way.

[–]chrysea1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There are a lot of people that talk about archetypes. Carl Jung isn't necessarily "scientific", and archetypal thinking isn't either. There isn't any true scientific theory that defines gender roles.

There's definitely science applicable to gender roles, though. But yes, of course I agree, multiple disciplines would be necessary to write anything insightful at all.

But they do agree that people have independent expectations of their mates, that inherently sexist in nature. That's one favoring factor of TRP, provide conditions are set, which TRP does a crude job of doing.

Right, insofar as TRP helps people in certain situations with a certain set of cultural conditions -- I can buy that it has applicability to very specific people. I think it's perpetuating idiocy too, but that's neither here nor there.

Which books of Carl jung have you read? Do read any jungist?

The Red Book is sitting on my desk right now if that's any clue.

But in TRP primal is mean to be purely sexual, or passionate behavior from a woman, animal like sexual behavior. The assumption is that if a man is alpha enough, he can evoke sexually ingrained patterns in his woman, and if he's not he can't.

But "ingrained behavior" is so ambiguous... it's implicitly referring to drive theory without realizing that drive theory's been pretty well debunked.

I think in picking up women, and even in relationships it's important to have a method or experience so can get past your inevitable small failures.

Right, theories have a practical use, even if they aren't comprehensive. I think there are better theories, though. Hell, there are some positively enlightened PUA guys at the fringes of the community.

They do limit themselves. But they say they don't. It's kind of humorous in a way.

I agree.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]chrysea1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]chrysea1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well there's the original, fat chance of getting that. And there here are 2 new ones one with illustrations one without.

Ahaha, no, that thing belongs in a museum. Jung's art/calligraphy is worth that, much less his writing. Ridiculous that he could be so talented. I have the one with illustrations (Christmas gift from my paramour!).

It does. It's mitigated by 2 things: success in sexual conquest, and sorting ability. Over reaching, is mere hyperbole designed to give direction to the follower. Even if it's in many ways a mirage, it's still useful. Just like man walking in the desert. Cause in reality, no one will ever be, or could ever be supreme alpha.

I certainly agree with you in the sense that theories can act as mirages. I believe that.

I do think the same value could be achieved (assuming TRP is especially well-suited to this theoretically follower, for whatever reason) by finding one of the more generous-minded PUAs (like, say, Johnny Soporno) and listening to them for awhile. It's definitely not my scene -- and I have issues with a lot of what those guys say -- but at least they aren't reinforcing their tenants with bile and rigidity, you know?

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ahaha, no, that thing belongs in a museum. Jung's art/calligraphy is worth that, much less his writing. Ridiculous that he could be so talented. I have the one with illustrations (Christmas gift from my paramour!).

Interesting gift. He must know you well. :). It's a fascinating read. It's trouble because it's useful, beginning to understand thing life. You can go really deep into that rabbit hole, I suggest not doing that, though. ;)

I can see while Freud was so against him. He's marginalized but he's clearly one the greats of the field.

I certainly agree with you in the sense that theories can act as mirages. I believe that.

Thanks

I do think the same value could be achieved (assuming TRP is especially well-suited to this theoretically follower, for whatever reason) by finding one of the more generous-minded PUAs (like, say, Johnny Soporno) and listening to them for awhile. It's definitely not my scene -- and I have issues with a lot of what those guys say -- but at least they aren't reinforcing their tenants with bile and rigidity

I'd say yes. However, PUA's answer to relationship problems is just have sex 10 women you'll forget the last one. And PUA is a whole skill. I don't think TRPers are to that level, because a lot of them are just not in that mindset. A lot of them are struggling to find a way maintain a relationship where they forget they needed lead. There using alpha in different way, than a PUA might. TRP is kind of alpha lite and PUA lite mixed in with touches white supremacy. Crazy concoction but good for me to lick their wounds. Besides all the PUAs I've change very quickly when they become married or hooked up.

[–]chrysea1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

See, though, I don't think the way TRP uses alpha is valid. In fact, I don't think the idea behind alpha is valid at all, but at least PUA's is not always underlined by atrocious misuse of the idea of evolution. The idea has a little heuristic value, but is too philosophically and scientifically misleading to justify itself.

I think you misunderstand what TRP is trying to do. They aren't scientifically doing anything. They are using science to illustrate a point to non scientist. But that doesn't really matter beaches the guys, and people unless clinical, are never going to have experience enough to make any statistically significant observations. For example, most pro baseball players don't understand the physics of curveball, but they can hit it. They may talk some stuff about how the ball moves even if it's non scientific but it gets the job done. Picking up women, and dealing with relationships, is a lot like hitting baseball. You have to have good technique, doesn't matter where you got it, and you're a star at 30% success rate. Not only that, you have to have an idea where the ball is going be order to hit it. That's what TRP does, it tells followers where the ball is likely to be. The scientific thinking takes too much time, and isn't useful, and is wildly incomplete. Also unnecessary, when the success rate doesn't need to be high.

I would suggest , as a pragmatist, realize that the only that matters guys picking up chicks, and exiting when their wives/gfs are abusing of not sleeping with them. That's primarily TRP aim. So your point of PUA knowledge had merit, but I think scientific argument doesn't unless you feel the success rate could be higher in another method, or with more science. I personally think you'll struggle to develop that proof.

White supremacy? I wasn't aware that was a trend in TRP.

It's not strong but within the literature.

[–]chrysea1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They are using science to illustrate a point to non scientist.

But they aren't using science at all, is the point. And more often than not, I've seen them masquerade their biases and philosophies, based in large part on their resentment, on "reals" and "reason" and "logic." They think that articles about brain scan differences between the genders means they're right (and they seem to have no idea what brain scans mean, or that those studies have undergone heavy and scathing critique-- in short, they have no idea how to evaluate pop science, like most of the population).

For example, most pro baseball players don't understand the physics of curveball, but they can hit it. They may talk some stuff about how the ball moves even if it's non scientific but it gets the job done.

But a baseball player isn't perpetuating sexist memes for lack of knowledge of statistics. If TRPers were like, "well this is heuristic for me," I promise you, I wouldn't bother to come here and debate.

I would suggest , as a pragmatist, realize that the only that matters guys picking up chicks, and exiting when their wives/gfs are abusing of not sleeping with them. That's primarily TRP aim.

I think in this, we actually do feel differently. I really think TRP in many cases promotes a worldview that is very hostile to people antithetical to it (i.e., me -- I'm as big of a gender-rebelling feminazi as you're ever likely to encounter -- and the people I'm romantically interested in). They're not just technique, in short, but a lot of dressing. And while philosophy can be pragmatically useful too, my point is that you can get there without sexism.

I would suggest , as a pragmatist, realize that the only that matters guys picking up chicks, and exiting when their wives/gfs are abusing of not sleeping with them. That's primarily TRP aim.

The scientific argument only has merit, in terms of our pragmatic framework, insofar as they're actually doing harm with it. I think they are, and I didn't quite explain that before. Heuristic theory is always going to involve people who take things too far and forget that it's a limited framework, but it's always quite another thing when it starts turning people against each other.

[–]masterrod1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

But they aren't using science at all, is the point. And more often than not, I've seen them masquerade their biases and philosophies, based in large part on their resentment, on "reals" and "reason" and "logic." They think that articles about brain scan differences between the genders means they're right (and they seem to have no idea what brain scans mean, or that those studies have undergone heavy and scathing critique-- in short, they have no idea how to evaluate pop science, like most of the population).

They are using science just deliberately badly.

But a baseball player isn't perpetuating sexist memes for lack of knowledge of statistics. If TRPers were like, "well this is heuristic for me," I promise you, I wouldn't bother to come here and debate.

Well baseball does exactly what you're saying TRP does, even though sports statistics are well know, but statistical analysis isn't. Regardless, I can understand that it's close to home so there is different type of analysis. So, I think your view has merit. In the group the sexism makes sense, cause it's designed for a specific purpose. But outside the group it can appear as deplorable behavior. Moreover, I think you're giving a little too much credit by saying "heuristic". I am sure TRPers every where applaud you.

I think in this, we actually do feel differently. I really think TRP in many cases promotes a worldview that is very hostile to people antithetical to it (i.e., me -- I'm as big of a gender-rebelling feminazi as you're ever likely to encounter -- and the people I'm romantically interested in). They're not just technique, in short, but a lot of dressing. And while philosophy can be pragmatically useful too, my point is that you can get there without sexism.

You could get there without sexism, but you need efficiency to be effective. Sexism is a way to "cheat" efficiency. If you go the route learning all the different types of women, and then developing proper graduation each type of woman, then develop a worthwhile sorting method for the few you want to sleep with , you will be masturbating both mentally and physically for a long time. After all that, it has to be intuitive to be useful. So your idea is just not practical. It's more TRP gives up hard logic for speed.

What is practical is tell people act like this person you see in movies, and he's an alpha. That alone will get you laid more. And if you've been acting too submissive to your wife, act little bit more concerns about your needs, that can help your relationship.

There are many studies on helping a relationship, but it gets complicated. So it's important to have starting, and you need sex basis for simplicity. Perpetuating hating sexes doesn't help anyone.

The scientific argument only has merit, in terms of our pragmatic framework, insofar as they're actually doing harm with it. I think they are, and I didn't quite explain that before. Heuristic theory is always going to involve people who take things too far and forget that it's a limited framework, but it's always quite another thing when it starts turning people against each other.

This is true. I think also the fact TRPers are actually trying to fraternize with those they "hate", kind of devalues their aim of sexism. The only problem is not everyone sees that.

[–]weirdlemonade81 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Shadow_Nirvana1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmpathyLocker6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmpathyLocker3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmpathyLocker2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Is preparation/learning about relationships only bad when it comes to sex?
Author	masterrod
Upvotes	2
Comments	174
Date	January 26, 2014 5:32 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1w7d9v/is_preparationlearning_about_relationships_only/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/is-preparationlearning-about-relationships-only.286312 https://theredarchive.com/post/286312

Comments