TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Q4ALL: What kind of men DON'T have the provider instinct?

October 26, 2017
4 upvotes

It's said that men still have provider instincts even in a modern feminized society. Even though women can work, men still have territorial and providing instincts and will still take on the burden if necessary (or it hurts their pride if they are not able to provide).

What kind of men DON'T have this provider instinct? What kind of men really push away the idea of having their own family? What kind of men are turned off from sharing their money with his wife/children?

(I know the big answer is a RP guy who is aware of divorce rape but I'm looking for answers outside of that)

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 This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate.

/r/PurplePillDebate archive

Download the post

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

Post Information
Red Pill terms in post
Comments

[–]Eastuss7 points [recovered] (17 children) | Copy Link

I don't think there's a direct "provider instinct", the behaviour appears because of multiple environmental and instinctive reasons.

In a couple, both are supposed to cooperate and provide, but since the man often earns more money, he'll be provider on the money aspect. And then, society and moral makes it expectable that the man provides. I don't know a single man that is willing to provide for a woman for no freaking reason, but I know women who expect men to provide for no freaking reason than the privilege of their presence.

Instinctively, men will change themselves to solve a problem, while women will change their environment to solve a problem. Which means that when the woman doesn't have enough money, the man will provide, and the woman will make the man provide. But when the man doesn't have enough money, the man will work it up, but the woman will leave.

TRP tells you that these societal and moral codes are bullcrap, that you shouldn't over cooperate in any way (commitment, money, general availability) because the other expects you to do so for free and that is just bad for you. And for those men who do not have the instinct to change themselves instead of changing the environment, well they stay incels because they're not manly enough.

Especially, marriage is a shitty deal, because there are obligations toward your resources but there is no obligation on her hand. You are wealthier, therefore your money prevails. You are polysexual, but you are supposed to be faithful. She is hypergamous, she can leave at any time with your money, there's just no restriction on her hand about what matters for her and about what she possesses. I believe marriage would be great for lesbians who have feminine goals. For anybody else, including women with masculine goals, it's just bad.

We could argue that all this may change once women are as wealthy as men, but it's unlikely to happen because of hypergamy isn't a societal acquired trait.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 0 points1 point  (16 children) | Copy Link

Especially, marriage is a shitty deal, because there are obligations toward your resources but there is no obligation on her hand.

A good beta will make sure he gets his money's worth in women. If he is wealthy he should make sure the woman is of a considerable higher SMV level than himself. That is how you can leverage ressources in a monogamous society.

Of course, all the divorce and alimony and what not have ruined much of this - so hide your money away from grubbing hands.

[–]Eastuss༼ つ ▀̿_▀̿ ༽つ 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

And the main counter argument to that is that the woman will initiate a dead bedroom, because, as I said, she has no obligation to share the resources she has in abundance to you, and she has no obligation to stay.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Dead bedroom = divorce. Men and women both, in relationships need to base it on things beyond love, especially they also must find utility with each other. One of the utility which women provide is sex on demand.

[–]Eastuss༼ つ ▀̿_▀̿ ༽つ 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Dead bedroom = the woman get to keep her provider and not pay back. If he divorces, she got paid for it. That is to say, getting married as a man is about you to sign down that you remove all your powers and give it to her. Don't put yourself in a situation where someone has all power over you.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

That's true. Marriage should only be contemplated in such a situation where you 1) have no ressources; 2) your money and income are equivalent to hers; 3) have your money securely stacked away in inaccessible places, outside the reach of grubbing ex-wives and courts.

[–]Eastuss༼ つ ▀̿_▀̿ ༽つ 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There's still something to consider though.

I made a child to my partner. If I did left her, she would have lived 3 month in incapacitating state on her own, 8 month without any income in maternity leave, and no car, nothing. She basically couldn't have done anything and I had all power to leave because we're not married.

And in the end, she lost opportunities for her career to grow because of that.

And that is difficult to evaluate how much money that represents.

So we were in a situation where I had all powers. And just as it isn't right that men can be divorce raped, that isn't right that I can leave her in deep financial shit while having forced her to give up on lot of things.

So I don't know what the middle ground could be.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq. 2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

so hide your money away from grubbing hands.

That’s a terrible suggestion and a good way to have more than the statutorily-mandated marital property split forced upon you by the courts.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Nothing to split when it's all in the British Virgin Islands.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq. 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

You're fucked if you get caught.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You are? I wouldn't know. I mean, is it even illegal? But I agree, it's not practical for most average men.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq. 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

It is considered fraudulent to hide marital property in a divorce lol.

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

heh. "Marital property" what a loony concept. I have my companies in Hong Kong & The Seychelles. I worked hard for those and would rather go to jail that give it away. That goes for ex-wives as well as states. But yeah, if you're middle or upper middle class, don't marry in the USA. USA is crazy.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq. 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Aren’t you Dutch?

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Danish! The Dutch are weaklings who live in the soft south. Why do Americans always mix up Dutch and Danish? I haven't lived in Denmark for a long time though. But divorce laws are much more reasonable in Denmark than in the USA.

My grand-grand-grand..-father was a pirate who previously fought on the Dutch side in the war of indepence against Spain. He later had his last son when he was 103 or something. I wonder if pirates are rp.

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

A good beta will make sure he gets his money's worth in women.

how, prey tell does he do this? How does one use money to ensure he's fucked on the regular by his high SMV woman? what societal tools/pressures does he have to attain this? What recourse does he have when she doesn't?

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

First of course he must select carefully. He has the money, he makes the decision. Secondly, if she doesn't continually fulfill her side of the bargain then its divorce time. And as I stated other place, it should make double sure to protect his assets before marriage.

But really, how common are dead bedroom scenarios really? I've never had one, never heard of any who had (although perhaps they wouldn't say) Women want sex too, and if not they are usually up for some anyway,

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

From what I can tell many of them are on reddit. I’ve seen many freely admit that just getting by, don’t bother me with anything is just the kind of rootless and solitary life they prefer. I can’t say I know many people like that. I mean yes I know a couple people who decided that after college they’d just work on their drug habits and work crappy service jobs but they still go home for the holidays and the annual family ski trip. If a guy doesn’t want to get married and take care of anyone or anything then I guess he should just say that up front. I can’t relate to people who don’t want to integrate their lives with other people in a lasting and meaningful way or that don’t even want to build anything. Maybe I spend too much time with architects.

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

I don't really see the connection you're making here. You can build up your career without getting married and having kids. In fact I'd argue you can have a better career if you don't get married and pop out sprogs. You have more time to devote to making money if you wish, not to mention more disposable income out of the money you make. Of course you also have more time to devote to lazing around if you wish. That's down to the individual, I don't see how it's connected to married or not.

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

Hmm it’s not really connected. I was just speaking generally really about people who prefer being alone. I’m just doing what I always do, not so much answering the question as saying what I want to say. Lol

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

Lol fair enough.

I associate those people more with having their own shit going on more than anything.

The kind of people you're talking about are just lazy, I wouldn't define them by preferring to be alone, that's just the default because they cba to do anything else.

People who actively prefer to be alone are ones who have a lot going on in their lives outside of that in my experience.

[–]Aaren_Augustine3 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

People will go out of their way to NOT have a full human experience; just to protect their pristine, reflective ego. They will kill their hopes and dreams and wonder why theyre so fucking angry.

[–]Dweller_of_the_AbyssFeel the Bern 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

If your hopes and dreams don't exist, or have too high a ROI to make happen, then it is better to not pursue them and become "fucking angry."

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no "provider instinct", there is a protector instinct

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Provider instinct for 'their' tribe.

We all have it, question is, are you in our tribe?

[–]wtknightGen X Slacker 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men with personalities on the cynical and distrustful side in general may have a muted provider instinct. If certain men don't trust women and think that the custody rights for the offspring who are their heirs can be taken away from them easily, then their incentives to provide may not be as strong, and income they make is more likely to be spent on themselves in a self-centered manner rather than saved and then used for future offspring.

Men with confidence issues about interacting in the real world would also have a muted provider instinct. I just read an article about how many men are playing video games these days and not out interacting in the real world trying to find jobs, attract a mate and eventually have a family. Essentially, these men do not have the confidence and desire to interact within the capitalist system and the demands that are placed upon them within it. The issues could be internal and psychological, or external and due to the labor pressures and changes of the capitalist system, but likely they are a combination of both of these.

[–]darla10 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

My ex husband.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

AKA bros before homes.

AKA, a reasonable solution to modern hypergamy (if you can't beat em, join em)

Also explains your red pilling. You've seen how it can affect you.

[–]darla10 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Pfft. Financially, I still provide 100% for myself. But at least I don’t have to provide for the man too (like I did with my ex). The type of ‘providing’ I require is the emotional rock.

Financially, things are 50/50 this time around, which is a relief. But I’m weird because I have an aversion against a man paying for me. It’s prob an insecurity of some sort.

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

Yeah, i told you before. He treated you like BB, Its enough to put anyone in the anger phase lol

[–]darla10 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Rawr!

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

lol.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Most younger men don't have the provider instinct. Men born after, say, 1985 don't seem to have it. (It isn't really an "instinct", it's more a set of learned and culturally ingrained attitudes and behaviors, I think.)

They don't have it because they don't need to develop it. Nor do they need it to attract women. They need Game to attract women, and that's where more men are developing, if they're developing at all in the realm of intersexual relationships.

[–]SmurfESmurfersonStacy’s Post-Wall Mom 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Definitely apt - I'm seeing IRL right now, and it's boggling the minds of all the other (older) men in my social group.

Our youngest guy friend (33) is essentially a kept man right now. His gf - who is older - is a heart surgeon and former model who (as far as I can tell) cares more about having a protector for a boyfriend than a provider. She's happy to pay for everything he wants, including multiple cases of his favorite wine, a family weekend get away, an upcoming romantic trip for them to Aruba, and all the meals and drinks he wants.

He has alligator arms - doesn't even try to reach for his wallet. But he's super protective of her, incredibly chivalrous, and has provided support through some stuff she went through.

Not a single other man in my social group can wrap their head around him being ok with being a kept man.

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

I totally get how your young friend is OK with being a "kept" man. I also understand why younger men around that age aren't internalizing the "provider instinct".

Your young friend is perfectly OK with being a kitchen bitch. He doesn't have to work to provide for his needs, so why should he? He's got a sugar mama to do it for him. He's getting great sex. All he has to do is protect her, listen to her, and open her doors so your heart surgeon/model friend feels like a pretty girl, feels sexy and desired, feels like she doesn't have to carry all the weight all the time, and that he "cares" about "how she feels". That's pretty easy, really.

[–]SmurfESmurfersonStacy’s Post-Wall Mom 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm interested to see where this goes. They seem to have complimentary masculine/feminine mixes, psychologically. He provides the protector stuff, as well as a family dynamic (he has two kids from a previous marriage, and a very large, close knit extended family). She provides the money, and a hyper feminine appearance/behavior that he loves.

It's also interesting to see how wildly, wildly uncomfortable this makes all the guys in our circle. They cannot wrap their heads around that dynamic - and it's all aimed at the guy in the relationship, not the girl (I'm guessing in part because we were all friends with him for years, and only met her when he brought her around).

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

It will not last between your "kept man" and your heart surgeon/former model friends. She will eventually resent paying for all his shit. Because, in her mind, she is the woman, and she should not have to pay. And because he is the man and he should pay. He should support her. It does not matter that she outearns him by several multiples. It does not matter that she is sexually attracted to him and likes his "protector" role. She is the woman, and he is the man, and it is HIS job to financially support HER; not the other way around.

IME, women do not like financially supporting men, and she'll eventually lose attraction for him. she will not be able to figure out why. But I know why -- it will be because she resents having to support him, because she wants to "be the girl" and expects him to be the boy. She will eventually view him as a little boy who can't do anything for himself, will view him as a child, and will lose attraction for him.

You read it here first.

[–]SmurfESmurfersonStacy’s Post-Wall Mom 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Actually, I think she got burned hard by her higher earning ex - he spent his money on cocaine and high end escorts, which she found out about the hard way. She's developed a weird phobia of higher earning guys.

My prediction is that she's going to get fed up with his lack of drive - he's perfectly capable of earning approximately what she makes (given his career path). I think she's going to get annoyed by his happiness to just work one day a week under the table bartending, and lean on her 100% for the rest.

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

I think we're saying pretty much the same thing, in different ways. It very well could happen, and probably will happen, the way you've stated it.

[–]justhanging92 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

But if the guys provides enough masculine energy in all other things, why is the financial support going bring the relationship down? It's one thing vs all the other things. You also did say the "provider instinct" is mostly a learned behavior, why would a woman resent something when it isn't even instinctual?

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

What kind of men DON'T have this provider instinct? What kind of men really push away the idea of having their own family? What kind of men are turned off from sharing their money with his wife/children?

Very simple to answer. Men who are unplugged from the matrix.

Human brains have a large degree of neuroplasticity. Humans have the capability to rewire themselves. This is how we are able to quit bad habits, or control our lust.

As a human you are capable of going against your biology. And only men who have reached this stage can forgo the provider instinct willingly.

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Short answer

MGTOW

Long answer

If you mean provider as in "male breadwinner, men protects women, love flows down respect flows up" then that falls in most non-traditionalists. I consider myself non-traditional in this way too.

If you mean provider as in "I am willing to give for the ones I love" then the people who don't have that are usually bitter MGTOWs and other people not worth dating.

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

Attention!

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

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

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

[–]tempuserthrowaway5Good&Plenty 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not aware of anyone male or female who feels deeply obligated to provide for another adult outside of special circumstances. Plenty of people will provide for one another if they have the luxury of having extra in order to do it, but I wouldn't call it an instinct.

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

Chad

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

Men who are over reliant on their mom, men who don't pay child support, misanthropes, men who just want to be single, normal clueless betas.

[–]Hungry_AF2 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Unworthy men.

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

Basically this.

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

There may not be a man who exhibits zero provider instinct, but there exists a range of behaviour. Some of it is probably genetic, some of it socialised. If women choose to have kids with provider men, kids will have provider genes, and they'll grow up to be socialised to be provider men in that family. If women choose to have sex with non provider men, the kids will have non provider genes, and they'll probably not be socialised to be provider men. The latter is what's happening. Within a few generations you'll have a completely dysfunctional society.

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

What kind of men DON'T have this provider instinct? What kind of men really push away the idea of having their own family? What kind of men are turned off from sharing their money with his wife/children?

One who values freedom above all else I'd imagine.

[–]sadomasochristNo pull out game 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Foundation of core RP. "Women want access, men want freedom."

[–]sadomasochristNo pull out game 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's said that men still have provider instincts even in a modern feminized society.

That's because provider instincts serve the feminine primary interest. It's AF\BB, which is STR\LTR or Protector\Provider.

Provider = BB = LTR = Provisioning = Comfort

The answer has nothing to do with a "RP" guy. The kind of guy that isn't interested in being a provider is a male only interested in short term relationships, pumping and dumping women. That is a STR\Protector\AF.

This is why MRP is not actually under the TRP umbrella. Because even when you're a "silverback patriarch" you still are a provider.

You can downvote this all you want, but this is the black truth that most men are not willing to accept. They're willing to accept a lot of black truths until they realize there is no way out of the provider paradigm until they stop using women to validate themselves and stop looking for mutually exclusive arrangements.

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

The whole "provider" thing is bullshit. You are trying to apply evolutionary psychology to last ~5000-10000 years of human history. Human history that spans 200 000 years. And that's just the homo sapiens. Something as basic as instinct probably became "set in stone" even earlier.

Don't try to find "explanations" in modern, sedimentary agriculture humans. Look for them in hunter-gatherer tribe humans. That are the conditions we "evolved for". Not agriculture, not nuclear family unit, and not fucking money!

[–]kkohl98 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The Way of Men✊

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

Entitled douchebags.

Nothing to do with awareness or TRP.

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

I've never dated a guy who had any sort of provider instinct.

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

What kind of men DON'T have this provider instinct? What kind of men really push away the idea of having their own family? What kind of men are turned off from sharing their money with his wife/children?

A crappy guy who I want nothing to do with.

There, I said it.

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

Lots of them. See my post "Men Are Lazy".

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

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter