~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Whisper
[–]Capital_Recognition64 points65 points66 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
To survive and prosper in such a world, a man must be able to act differently from other men, and suppress his protective urges until a woman has repeatedly proven to him that she will follow his lead and obey.
This would have been a good scripture in the bible. But, in case you've forgotten, it's almost 2020. So, I think the "Digital Western World Version" goes:
To survive and prosper in such a world, a man must keep many plates and throw the peace sign to any women who won't bust it open.
[–]RPthrowaway12313 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I fucked this one up just recently, tbh. The protective urges are strong and half the time they don't even want your help, but somehow I keep forgetting. It's fucking frustrating sometimes.
[–]Chaddeus_Rex10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Its difficult to fight instinct - just as its difficult to overcome pain. But it must be done for success
[–]RPthrowaway1232 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It is painful in a way. My frame has been wounded somewhat by it, and now I have to work even harder to build it back up. But I will overcome this.
[–]Chaddeus_Rex4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Theres a saying I like,
"This too shall pass"
Just keep going is all one needs to succeed.
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l26 points27 points28 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
This is an interesting read. It supports that the "big heads" theory is not correct. It's probably not the size of the head that leads to "premature" babies. Turns out female hips can get wider to accommodate bigger heads, with no problem to locomotion and bipedalism. Human babies' helplessness has more to do with the metabolic burden they impose on the mother as they grow bigger.
Doesn't make the reasoning around babies, women and men false, of course.
Women never evolved to be "independent"...
[–]Endorsed ContributorKeffirLime15 points16 points17 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
If longer gestation was ideal, the female body would have evolved to accommodate it, provided the environment allowed for it.
I'm more inclined to think that environmental factors inhibited longer gestation periods. Things like requiring mobility to travel for resources, 18-24 months would simply be too long a period to have strained mobility.
Life expectancy and fertility window would also have played a role. Spending 18-24 months pregnant would significantly reduce the amount of children a women could reproduce in her life span.
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
That other factor, they contend, is mom’s metabolic rate. “Gestation places a heavy metabolic burden (measured in calories consumed) on the mother,” Dunsworth and her co-authors explain.
Wot? More so than the creation of digestible nutrients with the associated loss of efficiency? Until a baby starts eating solids, it still gets all its calories from the mother. Yes, I understand they'd could and would share the duty, but that's not a particularly sound evolutionary strategy. Plus I personally know women that were the sole source for up to a year or more. Seems like we are bitchslapping the first law here. Now if the argument was there is an increased physical burden (i.e. you can put down a baby from time to time, but you can't take a break from a fetus), maybe it would make more sense.
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
See also the critique of the Obstetrical dilemma in Wikipedia. They do support that milk is more efficient, and there are other considerations, mainly about energy burned rather than created by the mother (thermal stress).
For our discussion about gender Dynamics, the issue is that babies have a huge weaning period, for whatever reason, so this all might seem a bit academic anyway. But knowing how early hypotheses were formed, i.e. without much research, if any, I don't see a reason to give greater weight to the oldest one.
Human bands were actually at the top of the animal hierarchy, having practically no natural predators, so I think it makes sense for evolution to select for building potential during gestation, while delegating sufficiency, protection etc to the band.
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
so I think it makes sense for evolution to select for building potential during gestation
Definitely. That shouldn't be controversial at all.
[–]Lennvor1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Calories aren't the only thing metabolism needs. Those calories need to be burned, and they're burned using... ? (hint: it's a thing born babies get on their own and unborn fetuses do not. Getting it is traditionally one of the first thing a baby does on birth, and an interruption of the supply is one of the big things that can go wrong during said birth)
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Neonatal ATP usage is a fraction of postnatal plus oxygen transport is extremely efficient. As you might imagine, oxidative stress probably fell in disfavor with evolution a long time ago. While I buy there is definitely a limit, nutrient production v. nutrient consumption will always favor consumption.
[–]Chaddeus_Rex1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If you have a larger pelvic outlet and have a corresponding.increase in pelvic length, you have to have a angle of the femur that is closer to 180 degrees. That means weight bearing becomes more difficult the older and heavier the baby gets. The older the baby, the more it weighs - and because of poor pelvic angles that would be caused by larger pelvises that would mean inefficient ability to bear weight. Why do you think morbidly obese women can barely walk?
[–]Lambdal70 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yeah another pseudo-science hit piece.
The whole premise is “People need a lot of neurons, so you gotta start early.”
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
"Big head" theory is just that: a theory. Early evopsych started with hypotheses.
You're welcome to argue that the research above is pseudo-science, (I'd personally be very interested in reading your findings) but it will take more than a two-line comment.
[–]1942eugenicist0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
His first statement in the theory. I will absolutely love to debate you on it.
[–]1Self-honest21 points22 points23 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Very well composed. It does boil down to this.
Are you willing to be a plaything or not?
If your gut recognizes that you are being treated like a plaything, are you sticking around for the chance at some pussy?
If so, that pussy will recognize this and dry up.
Establish your frame when the first tests begin to trickle down and make it clear who will be the plaything in this interaction.
[–]tyronethejabrone4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Surprised to see this comment’s upvotes stall out compared to some others.
Good comment to a good post.
[–]EkMard8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
For some of the newer people here, Whisper is a TRP Vanguard, one of the founders of this sub, with some great posts that you can find in his profile. Take his advice, read the past posts of Vanguards and EC's.
[–]AvengerSentinel9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're honestly one of most valuable contributors on this subreddit, great fucking stuff man.
[–]2INNASKILLZ2K1815 points16 points17 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I don't really care about the 'big head' stuff.
The gold in Whisper's post is the idea of 'indifference'. Being indifferent and suppressing our protective instinct. Indifference game. Indifference game is one of the most important things I've learnt from Whisper.
It's actually something that can be expanded into other areas of life, not just sexual relations. So many people, especially men, want to help/save/rescue/fix others. It is an absolute killer. Not only that, it can be enabling people.
I have a career in working with vulnerable people. If they come to me and are willing to put in the work and need guidance, sure. Otherwise it is so refreshing to literally internalize 'indifference'. Not my problem, it theirs. I'll help encourage them to find their own solutions, but I'm not saving or whiteknighting anyone.
Applied to women, indifference is a game changer. I'm not here to save you honey, or whiteknight or swoop in honorably. I'm here to fuck you. If you're not a 'fuck yes', then I'm totally indifferent.
[–]5Imperator_Red0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I don't really care about the 'big head' stuff
So you don’t care about the reason why our theories are correct. You just want to be told what to believe.
[–]2INNASKILLZ2K184 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Firstly, nobody said this theory is correct. Secondly, no I don't greatly care.
I care more about actionable stuff. What behaviour is attractive. The game I can implement today.
Sometimes tracing that back to evolutionary psychology is interesting or helpful. Quite often, though, it isn't necessary knowledge.
If I behave in certain ways, it builds attraction. That attraction isn't any less if I don't know the evolutionary origins
[–]Einzakin3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
'Our theories are correct' is a self contradiction
[–]standardmissile6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
After a traumatic breakup I very effectively suppressed the innate desire to be affected by women, having an incredible amount of fun in the meantime.
However, I now have great difficulty reactivating a caring side even for women I know are high quality and submissive to me.
It's to my detriment as I'm closed off to more fulfilling relationships, instead optimised for short term fun. At 25 this is fine, at 36 I see it as a (growing) problem.
A great follow on piece would be on strategies to stay properly calibrated.
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You ARE properly calibrated.
[–]standardmissile2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Ah but you've reproduced, I haven't and would like to
[–]HorvathRed7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Get a married girl pregnant
[–]HighTesticles0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So you're an accelerationist then?
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Did you go through the checklist?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/3evm8f/seven_bad_and_one_good_reason_for_a_man_to_have/
[–]xXzZ_M4D-Sn1P3zZzXx6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think the problem with tradcons is they aren't tradcons. If you read any literature from before 1950 most writers are very clear; women are overly emotional and not suited for command, a man's purpose in life comes before his girlfriend until a suitable wife is found, and at all times women are expected to be obedient, and children seen not heard. 'Tradcons' now seem to have this view that women should be honoured respected and protected, but also that they aren't overly emotional, should be given positions of power and should put their career and education first. Honestly, read old books, when Men were in charge and kept women in line with social conditions they had a lot in common with trp apart from casual sex. And again monogamy is a concept developed by men for men to negate women's hypergamy, and even then in old literature there are a lot of 'mistresses,' most of the time the wife had to just deal with it. Terrible what's happened to the conservative movement. Unless taught from a young age women can become very manipulative, hypergamous creatures, although the same can be said for men without good father figures who become snivelling wimps, criminals or straight up rapists.
[–]EdmondDaunts5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There’s something buried in there that should be clarified. Men should not be actively dominant except over themselves.
Dominance is when people follow you by choice. But if your core is weak then you’ll start ordering people around.
Women put themselves in a relatively weak position when pregnant. So the man balances this. I can see your argument that this creates a tendency in women to always be the less dominant and that feminism is trying to fight the inertia, often with pyrrhic success.
[–]HighTesticles1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Been struggling with this lately. The decline in effort to reward ratio in an LTR inevitably causes me to over compensate with "dominance" to get the behavior I want/used to get easy, but it never works.
Anger truly is the hammer in our toolbox taking up most of the space, causing us to see a lot of things as nails needing to be beat into a wall. Truth is the amount of nails you will likely encounter is very, very small, if not nonexistent today.
At 30 now, I am finally beginning to internalize the inherent futility in rule by force, especially in today's gynocentric society. The only force that matters is uncle Sambergs and he's got his laws and guns so far up our ass that women mostly laugh or cringe at our reruns of "crug mad."
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
At 30 your only now starting to become an adult, so realize that everything you thought you knew is bullshit. Men don't know their heads from their asses until their a solid 33 to 35, it just takes that much life experience to really get to know yourself and who you really want to be.
[–]Dimenzije902 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Id really like to see more EC's post. Their threads are always worth the read. No offense to the rest of the posters. But its just hits differently from more experienced guys.
[–]TRP VanguardHumanSockPuppet4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's why the ECs are tagged. It helps you keep an eye out for good content.
[–]tyronethejabrone1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The people that shouldn’t be writing posts will always think their words are more valuable than they actually are unfortunately.
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And that's the biggest irony. I EXPECT my posts to get shit on six ways to Sunday. In fact if it didn't happen last time, I would have been very disappointed.
Meanwhile, /u/Whisper hits another one out of the park with this post.
[–]1handfulofnuts0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That was a brilliant post too. I don’t think it would have been shit on that 3-4 years ago. Hard to keep quality of membership high when it grows beyond a certain point.
[–]womans_algorithm1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Humans have LTRs instead of a mating season.
OFF WITH HIS HEAD !! Spin plates, fuck women, leave them in the dust!
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
ut also that they aren't overly emotional, should be given positions of power
He isn't wrong though. Primordial humans evolved such that females attached themselves to a man for several years at a time, remember that child is completely dependent on it's mother for years after it's birth, and there are multiple children.
A women's primary mating strategy is to find a high status alpha, have lots of kids with him while he provides shelter and food to her. The male also assists in food provisioning though the female is capable of foraging on her own, just not during late term pregnancy and after childbirth.
Now that's not always possible so women have also developed a secondary mating strategy over time. This is when they can't get a high status male to attach themselves to, likely because the high status males are already being guarded by their current females. So instead the female will attach to a lower status male for similar protection, security and provisioning, but will simultaneously look to secretly mate with the higher status male when no one's watching. This is our dreaded AFBB that has become so common today.
We like to think of "mate guarding" as a male thing, it's far more common among females. When a female has a high status mate, she will do everything possible to prevent other females from attaching to the male. This is a matter of life and death for them because a male neglecting her could indeed mean death. This is also why women tend to go ape shit when their men pay attention to stuff other then her, it's the same evolutionary instinct of self preservation kicking in.
[–]womans_algorithm2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Not sure if you replied to the right comment, but I agree with you.
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Was replying to yours but the reply with quote did something weird.
[–]womans_algorithm0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I see, but I don't get your point. With my comment, I was being sarcastic toward TRP mantra, while you explained female's dual mating strategy.
[–]5Imperator_Red1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Shocking how many people on TRP don’t understand this basic stuff, to say nothing of the general population.
[–]RicoDunne0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
*Sexism is hardwired into our species by evolution, as an inevitable result of our giant heads. Every social philosophy or sexual strategy is grounded in working with these two instincts, the female instinct to submit, and the male instinct to protect.
•Tradconism is an attempt to maximize the male protective instinct, through indoctrination, for the benefit of women. •Feminism is an attempt to minimize the female submissive instinct, through indoctrination, to enable women to more ruthlessly exploit the male protective instinct. •TRP is an attempt to teach men to selectively suppress the male protective instinct, to avoid its exploitation by women who are not submissive. *
This is why I hate being mislabeled a tradcon, when I'm RP.
[–]1942eugenicist-5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's funny that they always try to make it political. The author is alt right and not too bright.
[–]skuttt0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Why you here? Honestly wonder why since you clearly are dumb as fuck.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Capital_Recognition64 points65 points66 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]RPthrowaway12313 points14 points15 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chaddeus_Rex10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]RPthrowaway1232 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Chaddeus_Rex4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l26 points27 points28 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed ContributorKeffirLime15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lennvor1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chaddeus_Rex1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lambdal70 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]1942eugenicist0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1Self-honest21 points22 points23 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tyronethejabrone4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EkMard8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AvengerSentinel9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]2INNASKILLZ2K1815 points16 points17 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]5Imperator_Red0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]2INNASKILLZ2K184 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Einzakin3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]standardmissile6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]standardmissile2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]HorvathRed7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]HighTesticles0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xXzZ_M4D-Sn1P3zZzXx6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EdmondDaunts5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]HighTesticles1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dimenzije902 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardHumanSockPuppet4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tyronethejabrone1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]1handfulofnuts0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]womans_algorithm1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]womans_algorithm2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]3trplurker2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]womans_algorithm0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]5Imperator_Red1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RicoDunne0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1942eugenicist-5 points-4 points-3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]skuttt0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link