TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Q4MEN: Married men, how many of you knew you wanted to marry your wife the first time you met her?

August 25, 2018
9 upvotes

It's often said that men look at a woman and instantly see either 1) Plate, 2) ONS, 3) Future wife.

How true is this for the future wife category? How many of you knew you wanted to "conquer" your wife upon the first time meeting her?

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 This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate.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
Title Q4MEN: Married men, how many of you knew you wanted to marry your wife the first time you met her?
Author vanBeethovenLudwig
Upvotes 9
Comments 62
Date August 25, 2018 6:44 AM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/q4men-married-men-how-many-of-you-knew-you-wanted.261043
https://theredarchive.com/post/261043
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/9a4w39/q4men_married_men_how_many_of_you_knew_you_wanted/
Red Pill terms in post
Comments

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

I absolutely did not plan to marry my wife at all. In fact she was just a bang. One that then demonstrated to me that she was willing to make any sacrifice to make a me and her work. And she did.

The difference between her and other girls is just that. She knew that I would happily date her but not commit and she went straight for commitment immediately. When I said no she then tripled down on figuring out what she could provide my life, what she could do for me, to get me to say yes. And at every step in the commitment train she did just that.

I did not at all want to marry her at first sight and after the first week had her written off as a really great fwb. She simply refused to be my fwb. Not by freaking out or being a bitch but by crying and then asking me what more can she to, and then actually listening.

I suppose it really does all come down to communication. But I in no way knew that she would actually listen to what I said the day we met, nor did I know two hours later when I was banging her in a shitty motel room. But that was the key to my heart. She actually listened to me.

And she proved that she cared.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigroses are red, feminists are blue9 points10 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

Do you feel like you settled for a girl that you perhaps did not hold in high regard to (hence the original FWB), and simply married a girl that was madly in love with you?

Do you love her? Or did you choose to commit to her because she proved she cared?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Do you feel like you settled for a girl that you perhaps did not hold in high regard to (hence the original FWB), and simply married a girl that was madly in love with you?

We are not women, we can love someone by their actions and without high value.

did you choose to commit to her because she proved she cared?

Do you know how rare this is? I may not know his preference. But I know this is rare for way more than the great majority of men.

[–]Lewd_Crude6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

It's pretty fucking rare to find a woman who actually listens and empathizes vs just paying lip service. I've only found one lol and I married her too.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I think this is why men just go straight for hot women. We assume none of them are going to listen or empathize anyways that just leaves looks

[–]Lewd_Crude1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think this is why men just go straight for hot women. We assume none of them are going to listen or empathize anyways that just leaves looks

Most men are too afraid to approach a hot woman. I think it would be more accurate to say most men don't have a lot of preferences other than trying to find their looskmatch which even then doesnt always happen. Men just take what they can get which gives women little incentive to improve.

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

I am still looking my friend.... still looking.

[–]Lewd_Crude-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Good luck man. They are out there but it takes a lot of vetting.

[–]yaseedog will hunt-1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

We are not women, we can love someone by their actions and without high value

do you really believe this? if so, why?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

do you really believe this?

Yes

why?

Because the environment makes most men like that.

Lets divide in the bottom 80% men and the top 20%.

The bottom 80% of men live in scarcity of women. They spend huge amounts of resources for a chance to even meet a interested woman, let alone woo her. And even if he tries and spent all those resources, more often than not they will end up alone anyway. Got it? Ok lets continue.

For someone who lives in constant scarcity of something, if someone gave you that something, you will value it and the person, dearly no matter the type of thing you got.

Example, if you lived in constant hunger, tried a lot to get it, failled and a person comes and give you constant food you would end up holding the food he gave and his person dearly, even if the food was the lowest of the foods. It was still food, something none ever gave you. (That is the theory behind of the saying, "the path to a man's heart is his stomach")

If a woman gave one of those men love or at least acted selflessly, he would be extremely glad to her and her actions, no matter how not valuable she is. It is something you rarely find in a lifetime of a man. Our mothers are, for most part, the sole woman to love a man or act selflessly in their lives (that is the reason behind so many musics to mothers love by men, look at Elvis for example)

Now the top 20%. Those men have everything, they by no mean lack women acting selflessly or in love with them. So by default, no matter who he chooses to love, it will be partly by her actions, because for them, beauty full woman are plentiful. Although I doubt they will ever accept a low value woman.

Did I make sense?

[–]yaseedog will hunt1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

not really imo. Or at least I don't understand how that differentiates men from women in their ability to love someone "by their actions"

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

Or at least I don't understand how that differentiates men from women in their ability to love someone "by their actions"

Men will do almost anything for sex and/or a woman. Anything. Women never experience scarcity of men acting in their benefit or in nice ways.

Heck, some even believe it to be their default behavior or that they are being nice to be friends with her, which is a big mistake by their part. (Those are the rose colored woman and the friend zone stereotypes.)

Women, if they pass their prime and do not find a LTR are going to experience a scarcity of relationships with high value men. But never scarcity of all men or sex as there is gonna always be plenty low value men doing any and every thing to get in her pants or heart. Thus, if a woman can even love a man by his actions, it will not be by scarcity.

Did I make better sense?

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

I see. So in your view, why do women love men?

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

There are many causes to love (the feeling). By maslow if I remember correct comes from an amalgamation of the needs of people like the need for being loved, need for sex, need for company, need for social interaction, need for continuous interaction, need for comfort, need for safety, need for being in a group (couple), need for retribution, need for value, need for status and auto-realization

My previous statements were to show that the forces of value: scarcity and need (the precursors to demand and offer) in the case of action cannot be the same for both sexes. The same can be a given if you consider game theory (the economic theory, not the channel)

So, by what I understand of value and social theory, the women's value for men's actions has to be way lower than the equivalent value to men on average.

Did I make any sense? Wanna me to make a model? I think I can publish this.

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

ok slow your roll buddy :P let's go back to the scarcity thing

women's value for men's actions has to be way lower than the equivalent value to men on average

this all hinges on the idea that men experience scarcity but women don't. In this sub, I think the popular consensus is that this is only true when speaking of access to sex, which a) doesn't have the same value to many women as it does to most men and b) doesn't preclude the possibility that women may experience romance-related scarcity in other ways, i.e. access to relationships. Assuming you agree, how do these ideas fit into your model?

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

All men who are worth it settle. Then we spend the rest of our lives coming to grips with that.

[–]wekacuckLife is settling.3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I never tried to ONS or plate and I wouldn't date a woman if I wasn't interested in pursuing an LTR with her. But I wouldn't say I "knew I wanted to marry her" on the first date. Maybe more "knew I wouldn't not marry her". So I never had the "ONS" or "plate" buckets to sort women into.

Having said that, when I met my wife it was supposed to be a secret setup orchestrated by our parents but I figured out what was happening and forced my mom to confess before it happened. And I fully intended to not get into a relationship with this woman for that reason alone. But... we hit it off.

[–]wtknightGen X Slacker2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've never thought that I wanted to marry somebody just after the first time I met them.

[–]reluctantly_red1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I fell for both my ex-wives on second dates in similar circumstances. I met wife #1 at a party at a lake after my first year of college when I was 18. We had sex several times that night but didn't have much of a chance to talk. We spent the entirety of the next weekend (Victoria Day long weekend) at the house of a friend whose parents where out of town. Not only was the sex great but she was fun and interesting to talk too.

Twenty four years later I had similar second date with wife #2. We spent the Labour Day long weekend at a local hotel. The sex was great (biggest roundest backside I'd ever seen) and she was incredibly smart and fun to talk too. I asked her to marry me halfway through the weekend.

Neither relationship lasted but about 12 out of 17 years for the first and 6 out of 8 years for second where pretty good.

[–]prostate-apostatespectacle beta0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

A Hispanic whose an ass man , that's expected .

[–]reluctantly_red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm equal opportunity -- I like tits too.

[–]passepar2t1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

People who say this are full of shit. No one knows their future wife in advance, with a few exceptions that are almost all down to a lucky guess.

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

It's often said that men look at a woman and instantly see either 1) Plate, 2) ONS, 3) Future wife.

The fuck? Who says that? Women? Blue pill? Not men.

It is true that men have different preferences for sexual encounters, sexual relationships and romantic relationships (obviously). We want sex from all, obviously, but we need more from on the two latter.

Do i have to remember that most men (the 80% in the bottom) have no option, so they get what they can, no matter their preferences?

Also, this is a gradient. You have to have most characteristics of a sexual relationship plus some others to get the romantic relationship preferences.

The madonna/whore dichotomy does not apply here. Madonnas are only women we know/interact too much and become/are seen as family and thus the anti incest/pedophilia part of our brain kicks in. (Without it, we would have a serious problem as a species) but this is for relationships of years or more likely, decades.

We cannot know how we will interact with a woman in the future, by a instant look in their appearance but we can infer about how she is.

You may be confusing inference with knowledge. You, I and all humans can make instant inference in how a woman is by looking, mostly because women tend to show how they are or perceive themselves as clothing/makeup. But it is inference, not knowledge. I infer that a woman is interested in sexual encounters, sexual relationship or romantic relationship by her looks. But I need more information to know how I will interact.

Finally, who the heck knows how he will interact with a woman? I don't. I never planed a romantic relationship. Or sexual relationship. And I am always up to a sexual encounter when single. I just I think: "oh, she makes good material for a relationship, maybe I should secure this relationship, what would be the pros and cons?" If the pros are bigger than the cons I ask if she want to be my gf less than a minute latter.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Women and bp don’t typically say this either. Just in fairy tales or silly rom coms

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

Well... not TRP or men, thats for sure.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

This is the Snow White story, probably useful to society when marriages were arranged by the parents. “Here is your wife, you are now in love.” Still happens in some evangelical circles today. The honeymoon between these two virgins who had only met once wasn’t awkward at all, because they were “in love” lol https://github.com/mrs-codewriterohs

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

Maybe.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigroses are red, feminists are blue0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I infer that a woman is interested in sexual encounters, sexual relationship or romantic relationship by her looks.

Can you elaborate? Are there more details on this besides "if she dresses in a skin tight dress and stilettos the first date, she's a ONS?" How can you tell the difference between a woman wanting a sexual relationship or a romantic relationship?? (Asking for a male perspective on how he views women's makeup and clothing)

[–]HystericalprinceBlue Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

My wife is a beautiful Macedonian woman who works a really cool job, is really nice and she shares some interests with me. When I met her the first time, I didn’t want to marry her, but I was like “I would love if she was my girlfriend”. I met her at some stupid party, and I was too shy to ask her out I guess. This might sound creepy, but whatever, but I was like thinking about her on and off for a few weeks, then I randomly ran into her again at another party and by then I was like “well I guess I have to do it now, or I may never see her again”.

We dated for a while, and I never really thought about marriage, then one day I just decided to ask, and now we’re married.

[–]ImpenetrableHarmonis0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not necessarily always true but can be at times.When you know you know, and if you have to spend time thinking about it or if you can ignore certain issues, she probably isn't the woman you want to spend the rest of your life with. Thing is some people take time to open up and can become a completely different person once they feel comfortable enough to be themselves with you.

[–]theambivalentroosterLiteral Chad0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I did not intend to marry my wife when I first met her. It was supposed to be casual. Then she stayed over the second night and never left.

I fell in love with her by inches and then decided yep she’s the one.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's often said that men look at a woman and instantly see either 1) Plate, 2) ONS, 3) Future wife.

if anyone actually says this, they're an idiot.

the only thing a man is going to decide instantly based on a first impression is whether she is fuckable or not.

later once you get a feel for the girl's personality and attitude and all that, then you might start to think "wow this chick is cool and we really click" or "holy shit this bitch is crazy"

[–]mrdaveb580 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

within 10minutes of that seeing that smile she falls asleep and wskes up with that smile

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

Poetic and beautiful. But not much of an answer.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to MRS_DRgree[M] -1 points0 points  (21 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.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Hubby definitely didn't want to marry me the first time he saw me, I was making out with his best friend.

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

No men knows how he will interact with a woman instantly. Who even says that?

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷5 points6 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Welcome to the most unromantic place on the Internet.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

We must be sharing the same mind, I thought the same thing. This thread will likely go the direction of wow I did not want to know all that.......

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

It already has. The top comment right now just stinks of unrequested bragging about events and interactions that most likely did not happen.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ala field reports

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is like all FRs they are supposed to be aspirational not even the terpies believe them.

[–]Uncommon_Sense_12345 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

I asked him to marry me. When I dated I was screening for husbands.

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

I am not surprised.

[–]Uncommon_Sense_12345 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Never had an interest in dating men for fun with no purpose.

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

I am not convinced.

[–]Uncommon_Sense_12345 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Not convinced by what?

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

Never had an interest in dating men for fun with no purpose.

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

My SO (and most likely future husband) was 15 when we first met, he had no damn clue this is how we'd end up.

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I met my first husband through a mutual friend. I must have been 16 and he was 17 at the time. He called our friend up the next day and said, "I'm going to marry that girl." Of course she went running to tell me, but I laughed it off because I already had a boyfriend (or two, lol).

But I guess he was right!

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

Not a man, but two out of three of my brothers called me after the first date with their wives and said "she's the one". The third brother had more of a slow burn relationship (co-workers, casual friends, close friends, dating). I don't think there's a right or wrong way to go about it.

[–]hammerhauntsbread pill-2 points-1 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

How many of you knew you wanted to "conquer" your wife upon the first time meeting her?

If she is "conquerable", she isn't worth it

[–]Meetchel7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

A girl that wants to fuck your brains out because she's specifically attracted to you isn't adequate - why?

[–]Nodoxxintoxin7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“He wouldn’t want to belong to any club that would have him as a member” , thank you Groucho

[–]hammerhauntsbread pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because of the circumstances for how she wanted to fuck your brains out (which will almost certainly be temporary)

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigroses are red, feminists are blue2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Should have clarified - conquering means courting, not banging.

[–]hammerhauntsbread pill0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

It's obvious what kind of courting was implied

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigroses are red, feminists are blue2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

So...explain further please about why if she's conquerable, she's not worth marrying?

She's worth it if she runs away from you forever?

[–]hammerhauntsbread pill4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

If TRP works well on her, you have to be concerned with the other men who will be applying it on her.

[–]ThunderbearIMBlue Pill Man3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If a tactic works on her when she's single, it does not even remotely mean that it will work in a relationship

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

He’s projecting.

[–]hammerhauntsbread pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Uh huh

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

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