Is RPW partially normative?

lazysnakes · 2016-04-06T12:57:27+00:00

I think to be RPW you have to accept AWALT and that you have an instinctive AF/BB mating strategy. What you do with that knowledge is up to you.

This relates to something I commented the other day about the direction of the sub:

I realised I had been holding some assumptions relating to the RPW sub that were not necessarily true.

My previous understanding of RPW was that we were saying - we accept AWALT and we are going to try our hardest to not let those instincts get the better of us in order to be the best possible partners we can.

My new understanding of this sub is that we accept AWALT and will leverage that understanding to achieve whatever goals we set out for ourselves

The first being normative and the second not. (I think, I'm not great with these terms!)

I guess a normative belief relating to RPW in practice is that male-female relationships are more long-lasting and mutually satisfying where the woman tamps down her AWALT instincts and lets the man lead.

An assumption within redpill as a whole is that women want relationships and are miserable alone, and that men can be happy (or happier!) without women.

MsSadieDunham · 2016-04-06T09:38:23+00:00

AF/BB describes the female sexual strategy, but it doesn't say if it is good or bad

I've always gotten the impression that AF/BB is looked down upon in TRP. It doesn't sound like a good thing when you look at its definition.

Must you believe that "Men should act like men, and women should act like women" in order to be a RPW?

Yes, RPW actively encourages traditional gender roles in seemingly every area of life except that many of the practicing women have careers.

The whole normative vs descriptive idea is a little confusing to me, maybe answering those two questions and getting a response will help me understand it better.

EDIT: formatting

CamusSeesSumac · 2016-04-06T12:27:31+00:00

I worry sometimes that while a generalized RP strategy is process-oriented, RPW has been goal-oriented. This, in my opinion, is not how it should be, because it essentially puts convincing others that you have accomplished the goal of feminine perfection above continually striving to be better, and discussing how. Eg locking down a marriage vs becoming more attractive constantly.

Perhaps this is connected in some sense to an idea that RPW is normative - that is, if we look at a binary yes/no with regards to a goal, that requires defining the goal explicitly and telling others "this is the goal."

Let me know your thoughts.

FleetingWish · 2016-04-06T16:46:15+00:00

The issue here is you are using different meanings of the word "should" interchangeably.

The first meaning is "I want". When you say "Men and women should behave differently" you are saying "I want men and women to behave differently." This serves your own moral imperatives, because you want something to happen... and you have no idea how to incentivize the change.

The second meaning is "you need", in this instance you are suggesting a course of action for someone to achieve their goals. For instance if I say "If you want to be a lawyer, you should go to law school," I am not telling them what to do, nor am I imposing my moral values on them. My goal is simply help them get where they want. However being a discussion group, someone else might have a different opinion on how to achieve that goal. For instance, "Going to law school is expensive, you shouldn't go unless you are really sure. Instead, you should get a job as a clerk in a law firm and see if you like it."

The second "should" is what I think we want discussion to look like.

Title	Is RPW partially normative?
Author	coffeedynamics
Upvotes	5
Comments	24
Date	April 6, 2016 7:43 AM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RedPillWomen
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/4dksh8/is_rpw_partially_normative/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/is-rpw-partially-normative.86104 https://theredarchive.com/post/86104

Comments