TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

On the importance of vetting

April 11, 2019
101 upvotes

I come from a mediterranean culture and the other day I was having a deep conversation with my mom about my grandma's, hers and my life.
She said "when your grandma was young, the only possibility for women was to learn how to be a homemaker, marry and then make and educate kids."
We were talking about one of my grandma's sister who married a mean man who controlled and hit her and I asked my mother "so, who taught those women how to choose their man well?" and she said "no one."

I know we all have different views on feminism, but I think we can all agree on something : women didn't use to have a choice.
And now we do, and we can't let go of that because it is vital for our own happiness to be able to chose how we want to live our lives and with whom.

You don't have to be like my great-aunt who is still loyal to her decaying husband everyday, despite every horrible thing he did to her and their kids. You don't have to be like your mother, your father or anyone for that matter. You can be whatever you decide to be, but first you have to live and you have to think about what you want.
I sometimes see the advice of marrying young but I personally think it's best to have some experience in order to really know what you're looking for. Your first LTR doesn't have to be the last and look up on sunk cost fallacy if you're feeling trapped in a relationship.

I think vetting is the most important and useful advice we give here. Without it, we become like my grand mother and her sisters who didn't have a say in their lives.

Don't be like my grand-mother.
Cook and clean and be submissive because you chose to, not because some social theory told you so.
Vet with all your heart and soul, I can guarantee that when you find someone to spend your life with, you not only know it, but also feel it. Make sure to read up on the cycle of abuse and its signs, make a list if that's your thing (I surely did) with the important things you want in a man and also the most important deal-breakers. Put yourself out there when you're ready and don't forget to honor all of the women who made it possible for you to be able to make choices today :)

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 This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/RedPillWomen.

/r/RedPillWomen 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 On the importance of vetting
Author rp_lili
Upvotes 101
Comments 22
Date April 11, 2019 10:12 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit /r/RedPillWomen
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/on-the-importance-of-vetting.225027
https://theredarchive.com/post/225027
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/bby4lp/on_the_importance_of_vetting/
Red Pill terms in post
Comments

[–]ZegiknieEndorsed Contributor32 points33 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

A choice in who to marry and have kids with means we get to steer evolution. And that is a pretty big deal.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you, thank you, thank you for this.

[–]PHOENIX_THE_JEAN9 points10 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

I used to be and think like this. I'll be completely honest though.

Vetting is NOT enough. I vetted the shit out of my ex. He was sweet, charming, a complete gentleman and had a clean record....

Apparently the domestic violence and other charges weren't yet posted to my state's case search system. He definitely has domestic violence charges and other assault charges. He abused and choked me. I ran for my life in the middle of the night with nothing but a Wal Mart bin of clothes to my name.

I didn't see it coming. I'm a genius and didn't see the red flags. This is because the men are extremely great at hiding this side of themselves. To say "vet them" is almost like "you should know better".

You really REALLY will never catch one if they aren't sloppy or stupid :(

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

I didn't see it coming. I'm a genius and didn't see the red flags. This is because the men are extremely great at hiding this side of themselves. To say "vet them" is almost like "you should know better".

If you're a poor judge of character (unable to read people well), then you're simply unable to vet properly. Your IQ is useless if you don't apply it in a way that compensates for your lack of sharp instincts or a lack of keen observation (most people aren't observant).

Having good social skills and regularly socializing is important to practice reading people accurately. You can't learn vetting in theory, you need to go out and do it, and not just for relationship reasons.

[–]ZegiknieEndorsed Contributor2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure about this. There are some clear cases of people who smell off, sure. But people also change.

One guy (husbands side of the family) was kind of a psycho kid, then "grew up", settled down, married. The moment kids came into the picture, he turned completely nuts and dangerous. Psychosis? True colors showing? Who knows.

Several sweet family man guys I have known turned aggressive and nasty after brain infarctions.

Many came back from military service with a few loose screws (my husbands grandpa married his sweetheart, but in between that and kids, he had to do things I won't repeat here because readers might vomit or faint - my MIL loves to share, bless her).

There are always things that can go wrong.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

people also change.

With the exception of brain trauma/damage, people don't really "change", other than "become who they really are" by learning to let go (you can see this clearest in people who have grown old enough to completely stop giving any fucks), or "learn to hide who they really are" by learning how to blend in (such as people who seem to be avatars of virtues), given enough time.

People generally don't intentionally "hide" things from you, they're just in denial :p Most people lie to themselves more than they ever lie to anyone else. There's who they are, who they think they are, who they think they should be, who they want to be, and who others think they are.

It's difficult for me to describe how to pick up on all this, because it's mostly pattern recognition (the collective data from all the "small things" that a person say and do) --- you can either see it, or you don't. But I think a perceptive person could "get the hang of it" with enough social exposure.

It's not about specific traits, nor specific preferences, but the sum of it all (the "complete picture", the forest instead of the trees).


Anyway, actionable advice:

Online resources and self-help books are convenient, but they're like black and white pictures, compared to the full-color range of input you can get from talking to people in person. I was very active in volunteer/social work when I was younger because it gave me the opportunity to meet and get to know all types of people, and collect the life-stories from anyone willing to share theirs.

With enough experience/exposure, you'd have enough information to build your own framework to figure out what are the "tell"s (it's different with different people, but everyone has their own "pattern", and it's obvious if you're paying attention to the "complete picture").

Also, being uptight about virtues and "morals" (or "high quality"/"high value") is a handicap when it comes to vetting, because this inhibits your mental flexibility to pick up on the "small things" (you won't get the "complete picture"). You often hear stories of good people turning bad, but rarely the opposite.

[–]ZegiknieEndorsed Contributor2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

People who go on about virtues, I distrust especially. The loud ones (like religious leaders and protest leaders). People who joke too much about being bad/evil as well, but they are mostly jerks as opposed to truly dangerous. People who have a nasty sense humor can be vindictive.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Generally, yeah, but I usually reserve judgement until I have collected enough information that I can personally verify.

People who have a nasty sense humor can be vindictive.

Sadly, my humor-meter is quite broken, so I wouldn't know a nasty sense of humor even if I sat on one.

[–]ZegiknieEndorsed Contributor0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

"Sadly, my humor-meter is quite broken, so I wouldn't know a nasty sense of humor even if I sat on one."

LIES!

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

haha Sure, I can tell when someone is being (or trying to be) nasty, I just can't tell if they're trying to be funny-nasty, or just nasty-nasty, because it's all the same to me.

As for my personal sense of humor, it could be considered "nasty" if you look at it from a certain perspective, even when it's not my intention (and "good intentions" are what people use as an excuse to avoid taking responsibility for bad outcomes).

I'm never invested in being funny/nasty, because I'm always more interested in getting my message across to fix a problem (because simply calling someone a total retard won't make them any less of a retard, and therefore unproductive).

[–]ZegiknieEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Nasty sense of humor IMO is people who just generally enjoy and point out the flaws and misfortune of others too much, unnecessarily. Who mock harmless quirks with a clear undertone of contempt. Like a negative focus.

And you are very funny IMO.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

a negative focus

Yeah that's just the same as being outright nasty, regardless if bitchy cackling is involved (imo :p).

And you are very funny IMO.

You're very generous to say so! This is the part where I start to owe you muffins.

[–]__Some_person__1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

deleted What is this?

[–]PHOENIX_THE_JEAN1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

He would beat the crap out of his dogs and spent an entire month trying to lure and get my brother to fight him.

Yes. I witnessed him assault ME. I was THERE.

[–]hellokattie9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

He would beat the crap out of his dogs

That should have failed 100% of vet checks. Personally I take animal abuse more seriously than abuse towards people. The fact the animal can’t fight back means it’s on the same level as baby/child abuse and those people are monsters.

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

Eh it's hard to compare. I think I'd kick a baby if I was a psycho because it's so safe. It just makes sense cos if you kick someone like The Rock you're gonna die or get injured lol.

[–]hellokattie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The thing with true abusers is they’re cowards so of course they target the weak - that’s exactly why they are monsters

[–]padpump10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just a comment on the „they had no choice“. It used to be customary to ask Goya daughters had. So yes while that looks like she has no choice, he doesn’t either really. If the parents (who have a bit mor experience than the young ones) decline. That’s that no choice there.

Arranged marriages are yet another matter.

Having choice sounds good until you realise as you pointed out, that you have no idea what you want or need or even what’s available.

Societal customs have evolved so the inexperienced ones can benefit from the wisdom of “the ages” mistakes that were made before and solutions that worked.

Nothing is perfect. But asking for the blessing of your parents isn’t the worst idea either.

[–]Hoarder-of-Knowledge9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

okay, so I have done some historical anthropology in the past (not enough though, I really love it), andI want to add from that perspective a little. first of all, women in the past is a too broad and sweeping statement to be considered correct. we have over 2000 years of history taking place in such a vast amount of geographical space that there are fairly few universalities to be found there, and women had no choice in their partners is not one of those.

for example the wikipedia page of women of ancient Rome, specifies that before 1st century BC, they had abandoned a manus marriage in which women were subjugated to their men in favour of a free marriage in which men were not granted any rights of the women. divorce was allowed and fairly common and a source of gossip but not social dismay, (kind of like now) and remarrying was common in the higher classes. also, living together in a monogamous relationship of a male and a female was allowed and not considered shameful.

I have always find it odd that feminism seems to suppress the stories of women in more independent or equity settings so they can push the victim narrative. I think this erasure started with Gerda Lerner's the creation of patriarchy, or it is at least a prime example of it.

I also think it's important to touch upon the fact that freedom of choice, also means that you are accountable for the choices you make, and that freedom of choice is not necessarily a good thing if you don't have the knowledge or skills to make the right choice. Also the sheer responsibility for making the choice can lead to quite some negative feelings, involving the paradox of choice.

however i do think we as women are not alone in the difficulty of navigating the dating scene and knowing what to vet for. men have very similar problems here.

[–]espressolover1810 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

OP's post referred to her grandmother and her great-aunt, so I think it is safe to assume that when OP says "women in the past," she means women at least in the 20th, maybe 19th centuries, not ancient Rome, or, say, the prehistorical era or even before that.

[–]rp_lili[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

My post is not an historical essay nor an attempt to make us look like victims. My goal is to emphasize the importance of the process we call vetting in this sub. And I was talking about mediterranean rural culture not trying to make up an universality about women.

I have always find it odd that feminism seems to suppress the stories of women in more independent or equity settings so they can push the victim narrative. I think this erasure started with Gerda Lerner's the creation of patriarchy, or it is at least a prime example of it.

​ This really resonated with me because when I had my bad feminist period, I used to think that every woman behavior was "responsible" for the image and the oppression we seemed to suffer so much from. That view of mine lasted for less than a year, then I understood that we have the freedom to be whatever we want, as a PERSON and not as a genre. This woman, this one and a few others proved me that it has nothing to do with society, culture, oppresion or whatever. These women had clear goals, they gave everything they had to achieve them and whatever the consequences may have been, I'm pretty sure they felt happy and good about themselves. This is what I'm trying to achieve in my personal life, do my own thing and be happy.

About the responsability that freedom of choice brings, I'd argue it's a good thing. I think it's important to face the consequences of your choices, and that's, in my opinion the essence of being an adult.

however i do think we as women are not alone in the difficulty of navigating the dating scene and knowing what to vet for. men have very similar problems here.

I never said men don't have problems, but this is RPW.

[–]bunniebell1 Star2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely! It's amazing that we, as women, can choose our own path--but it was certainly "easier" when we forced into certain roles. By "easier", I mean the comfort of knowing where you fit into society without the worry of choices.

Women like your grand-mother, from her specific culture & generation, find themselves trapped with honor. Keeping her word is honorable, however it's now honorable to take yourself and your children away from a violent man. It's honorable to work out of the home to support your family.

As to vetting, you're right. it's necessary. Not foolproof, but necessary!

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

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