TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

      • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Spearhead

      • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Rational Male
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Men not marrying? How deep does "the problem" go?

[deleted]

February 15, 2013
43 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Men not marrying? How deep does "the problem" go?
Author

[deleted]
Upvotes 43
Comments 67
Date February 15, 2013 5:54 PM UTC
(13 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/18l9wo/men_not_marrying_how_deep_does_the_problem_go/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/men-not-marrying-how-deep-does-the-problem-go.235281
https://theredarchive.com/post/235281
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill

Comments

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points37 points 13 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

I'll get married as soon as the family and divorce laws are written in a way that if my relationship falls apart for any reason I get to have a clean break.
So, never.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. It's an unnecessary risk otherwise. Those who think to the contrary, well, best of luck to ya.

[–]TRP Vanguardlegendofpasta19 points20 points21 points 13 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

I'd need revised divorce and family laws, as well as a chaste woman. Historically and presently, women marry a man for his provision abilities. He used to get exclusive rights to her sex in exchange. Now though, you get a woman who has given it out to 10 or 40 musicians, drug dealers, low lifes... And now wants provision.

Why would any one marry now? Its a cute idea, sure, but it legally signs your pay cheque to someone who you're probably already banging everyday anyway.

What is in it for the man? What benefit could a man possibly get from marriage?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And don't forget that since you aren't her plan A, sex will quickly be scaled back or cut off soon after her provisioning is assured.

[–]barbadosslim-17 points-16 points-15 points 13 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

Maybe you shouldn't view women as items valued for virginity and sex

[–]SS2James10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you stupid or just a feminist? Marriage by it's very definition implies monogamy, ie. Women (and men) aren't supposed to cheat if they're married.

How does your sentence even relate to the topic? Stupid ass professional victims....

[–]1thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Are you stupid or just a feminist?

That's kind of a moot distinction, don't you think?

[–]Modredpillschool8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

How should you view women?

In the same vein, what precisely is valued in men?

[–]barbadosslim-2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

You should view them as people I guess. Same for men.

[–]Modredpillschool9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Sure, they're people.. but that's a meaningless distinction. For instance, criminals are people, but you are obviously going to have value judgments. What value does a criminal provide you? There's a good chance if you're raising children, you're not inviting a convicted felon to your thanksgiving dinner.

Why would you marry a woman but not a man? Because you're heterosexual and not gay? So you see value in women that you do not see in men? If you do not, why would you not then marry a man? They are both people!

[–]rds42 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

YSK that barbadosslim is one of the original SRS mods before he got an Archangelle account.

[–]Modredpillschool3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well this place must be heaven for him then.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I nominate thee master debator!

[–]barbadosslim-7 points-6 points-5 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Well you guys are kinda dehumanizing women by considering them an entry in a book, with a cost of money and a benefit of virginity and sex.

[–]Modredpillschool9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's a common misunderstanding of what we're doing.

Think of it this way: Ever notice how really hot women ignore ugly guys? Ever notice how really rich guys end up with really hot women? Ever notice how even modestly attractive hollywood actors have a plethora of female fans?

Women will only engage with men they see value in. They will not engage with a man they don't see value in. This is a basic tenet that you can test yourself. Go to a bar, watch how men and women interact.

There is no shame in this behavior. In fact, you're probably thinking, well good for women, they shouldn't be forced to go out with a guy they find unattractive!

And you'd be right!

So all we're doing is painting the other side. Women have zero mercy for guys they find unattractive. On the evolutionary scale, that means that guys who are really unattractive never pass on genes. They die without kids.

We're saying nothing more than the fact that we should not be shamed into going out with women we do not find attractive or see value in.

I'm not going to marry a woman who is past her childbearing years, because she cannot have my children. It's sad for her, sure, but the reality is I do not see value in it.

We all make value judgments about people around us. You keep friends that bring value into your life. You get rid of friends that cause trouble, drama, or that make you miserable.

Why wouldn't we do the same with women?

The idea that we're dehumanizing is a misnomer. You're trying to attribute more value to somebody than they inherently have. If a woman does not appeal to me, should I marry her out of duty nevertheless?

Furthermore, we are speaking in generalizations. When analyzing large populations, we will speak of average behaviors and preferences. This is not a comment on their feelings or humanity. It is impossible to dehumanize a group of people, because the group is not a human.

[–]barbadosslim-7 points-6 points-5 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Dehumanizing is the perfect descriptor for that whole thing.

[–]Modredpillschool[M] 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry, did you come here to discuss something?

[–]rds46 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I also think The Red Pill is bad for society.

What you probably will never admit to yourself: Man-bashing groups like SRS have created TRP, not the other way around. And TRP is a lot more attractive to men than men's rights: Improving the world is hard, especially with such the establishment trying to stigmatize it as misogyny, it's a lot easier to just say "fuck it" and play the stupid game to your advantage.

The shaming-people-into-submission strategy only works until the people you're pushing around stop giving a fuck about you. Congrats!

[–]barbadosslim-5 points-4 points-3 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

blaming other people for your misogyny doesn't really follow though, because you're responsible for your own misogyny

[–]rds44 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I'm not blaming you for "my/our? misogyny" lol, what an irrelevant, misguided response!

if you want an excuse to call me misogynistic you have to try harder than that.

[–][deleted]-1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Man-bashing groups like SRS have created TRP

I'm not even sure how to begin describing how many levels of lol there is to this statement. It basically boils down to "Men become assholes because women complain when men are assholes". TRP is nothing more than the death rattles of Real Men™.

[–]rds43 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"Men become assholes because women complain when men are assholes"

SRS is not women it's mostly men who are mentally fucked up. SRS can't be described as "complaining about assholes", and TRP isn't about becoming assholes it's about learning how the game works and playing it the way that's best for yourself instead of the way society wants you to.

As long as the unhealthy combination of natural female behavior, traditional male roles and feminist theory that lead to our culture and laws was implicit and hidden, few people realized there's something wrong, they accepted that this absurd state of affairs is just the way it is.

SRS' (and groups' like it) trigger-happiness, attacking everybody for the slightest disagreement with their ideology, has made people think about what exactly the problem is, and they've come to very different conclusions than SRS wants them to.

TRP is nothing more than the death rattles of Real Men™.

that's funny, but no. TRP will continue to gain traction and quickly replace our mangina culture, and hopefully force feminists to start caring about proper equality.

Check for example how - in articles or tv discussions - older feminists try to soften the nice-guy-bashing that young women are so into. The young ones don't even know why they hate manginas so much they have to make up all kinds of nonsense to excuse it, TRP knows why but it's not what they want to hear. And the older feminists are worried that something's gone wrong with the big project, since nice guys are the product of feminist theory, and now young women want "Real Men<sup>TM"</sup> but can't even admit it to themselves.

[–][deleted]-1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

SRS is not women it's mostly men

They're about 40% women. The rest of reddit is 15% women. Not going to read the rest of your insane ramblings. You're going extinct.

[–]rds43 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

More like 20% and 35%, but anyway, so you agree with me that SRS doesn't speak for women?

But for some reason that basic fact is so terrifying that you're afraid of reading the rest of my comment?

LOL.

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope. Afraid? LOL.

[–]Modredpillschool10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is fantastic and I recommend everybody watch it.

That said, I really wish she'd write her stuff down. Video is such a slow low bandwidth way to communicate.

[–]Bobsutan11 points12 points13 points 13 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

IIRC all of her videos are scripted and she posts the transcripts to her website:

http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/

Last time I looked it wasn't quite up to date with the most recent video or 3.

If for some reason you want a transcript that doesn't exist, there's a bunch of online tools available that will generate one. Just google "youtube to transcript" for a variety of solutions.

[–]underskewer1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Youtube has it's own automatic transcriber, but it is awful. Are you saying there are others that are good enough to be useful?

[–]Bobsutan0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 13 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

Wow, women on online dating sites deemed 80% of the male population on the site less than average. Is there any other stat that says it all so succinctly? Women are so incredibly shallow/picky and project that quality onto men more than ever.

Another great point she makes: Men NEED a way to defer their disposability. Men know they are disposable. They have no inherent trait that makes them desired or useful. They have to work their asses off to define their value. If you take value away from something, for example marriage, men will reject it.

[–]TRP VanguardWhisper10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow, women on online dating sites deemed 80% of the male population on the site less than average.

Well, it certainly shows they do not understand the concept of an "average".

[–]Gentle-Mang9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Wow, women on online dating sites deemed 80% of the male population on the site less than average. Is there any other stat that says it all so succinctly? Women are so incredibly shallow/picky and project that quality onto men more than ever.

It could be more of an incitement of the types of men that sign up for dating websites. Case in point

However from my experience of dating sites, the only women I've found tend to be:

  • Fat
  • Crazy
  • Single mothers
  • All of the above

[–]westcoastwiking7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not so at all man. You need to go to the free, causal dating sites.

OKCupid is crawling with normal-, and even hot looking chicks in their early 20s.

They're there to ride the carousel, or to have their egos stroked by the hordes of plebeian betas on there. Of course most don't realize that, they hamster it with something like "finding mister right".

If you file that under "Crazy" then you're right, of course.

[–]MonkeySteriods2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know about your area, but in mine it has a mix of girls who:

  1. Are looking for a replacement husband for their kid
  2. Are deceptive about their picture [it turns out the pic was years old and now they have trouble fitting through a door]
  3. The profile is fake
  4. They're using it to build their ego
  5. They're utterly paranoid of meeting anyone. Even a public place is too much for them.

My experience with OKC is so bad that it's completely turned me off to online dating.

[–]Modredpillschool0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is pretty much my experience too.

[–]cubemstr6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It could be more of an incitement of the types of men that sign up for dating websites

But 80%? Are you shitting me? Even if it is a little bit artificially high because of the shitty people on dating sites, that's still ridiculous.

[–]Gentle-Mang-3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I recommend trawling through one day.

Male and female attraction work in different ways, and a lot hinges on a well written profile. A lot of people are shit at writing profiles.

[–]rkg-pua 6 points6 points6 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL at well-written profiles being the attribute to attract girls online. Pls go.

[–]Gentle-Mang0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago [recovered] (0 children) | Copy Link

>implying that they're not

The number of times I've heard people say that they got a girlfriend, and just decided to write a ton of funny bullshit on their dating profile, suddenly they were knee deep in clunge, or at least messages from clunge. The profile makes a massive difference.

[–]niggazinspace6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

However from my experience of dating sites, the only women I've found tend to be:

  • Fat
  • Crazy
  • Single mothers
  • All of the above

HI I AM LISA I HAVE TWO CHILDREN A SIX YEAR OLD AND A TWO YEAR OLD AND THEY ARE MY HIGHEST PRIORITY IN LIVE ... BEING A MOM LOL. BUT I AM READY TO DATE AS LONG AS MY MAN RECOGNIZE THAT MY KIDS ALWAYS COME FIRST LOL.

MY BODY TYPE IS CURVY SO DONT RESPOND UNLESS U READY FOR DIS JELLY LOL.

MY GIRLS SAY I AM THE LIFE OF THE PARTY AND WHEN WE KICK IT I AM THAT GIRL WHO IS OUT UNTIL 4AM CLOSING THE BAR DOWN (DONT WORRY MY KIDS GOT A GREAT BABYSITTER LOL). BUT IF U CANT HANDLE ME AT MY WORST U DONT DESERVE ME AT MY BEST LOL. I PARTY AND I DONT QUIT AND I AM JUST AS COMFORTABLE IN SWEAT PANTS AS A FORMAL DRESS.

[–]Gentle-Mang2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

MY BODY TYPE IS CURVY

I fucking hate that. "ROUND" is not the same as "CURVY"

Fucks sake

[–]niggazinspace1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

On a dating site:

  • athletic / fit = normal

  • curvy = obese

[–]Gentle-Mang5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When they use the option: "A little bit extra" or "A few extra pounds" or whatever it is, we're into the realm of the ham-planets.

[–]1thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Another great point she makes: Men NEED a way to defer their disposability. Men know they are disposable. They have no inherent trait that makes them desired or useful. They have to work their asses off to define their value. If you take value away from something, for example marriage, men will reject it.

Actually women have the same problem... once they hit menopause (and actually before that, because their healthy-child-bearing capacity dramatically decreases after they hit age 40).

And once that "womb" no longer works, then a woman is just as disposable as a man (actually from the reproductive perspective, she descends down to the value of a eunuch -- which is even LESS desire/utility value than the majority of men, as a most remain fertile well into their retirement years, and in that they tend to be more financially stable, their "desirability/usefulness" {at least to the youngish "gold-diggers"} increases well into their 50's and sometimes beyond -- Cf Steve Martin, just fathered his first kid at age 67).

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 13 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I almost feel like marriage was created by blue pill men. Humans have a tendency to find ways to get a lot for as little work as possible. For a blue piller, that would mean getting pussy for as little work as possible. By bonding women to marriage, it will make them emotionally in debt if they whore themselves out to other alpha males. This essentially would mean once the blue piller and the women were married, the man would get pussy for life and wouldn't have to worry about competitors. However, as society developed, laws and womens views changed and now men are left at the mercy of their own creation. It used to be a good thing for blue pill men to get married because they would have access to a pussy for life but now the laws have made it a bad deal overall. FYI this is only a watered down version of my theory of marriage. Any opposing views would be awesome.

[–]Modredpillschool16 points17 points18 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Marriage and the forces at work (slut shaming, religion, legal systems) were in place to mitigate hypergamy. Back in the day, a woman had to marry to survive, and would be ruined if she divorced or cheated.

Now, women don't need a man to survive, and there's zero consequence for leaving a man. Thus the end of marriage.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

They may not need men in one sense. But, to the day they die they'll want a functioning erect cock. The older they get the harder it is for them to find let alone get one. Up'em,that is.

[–]Modredpillschool5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

What good is that lesson after they're too old for us to care about? Sure women after 35 are miserable, but at that point it's too late to change.

I don't see anything reasonable teaching new young women to take heed.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes you're right. I'm dating women older than that. Have plenty of buddies doing the same. It becomes a buyers market as far as men are concerned in my age group. I just don't find them attractive or interesting below 35. I guess I may be ducked up. Though it seems the reality for men my age.

[–]TheIslander8294 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I just don't find them attractive or interesting below 35

Try 18, 19 and 20. I never date any girl over the age of 24.

Try it for 1 year at least, then go back to the old ones and compare.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It'll be rare for men my age to do that. Without paying for it or moving to Thailand or Mexico.

[–]TheIslander8290 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How old are you? I'm pretty sure you can date 20-year-olds until you're 55.

[–]Modredpillschool1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. I find them too bitchy over the age of 20. Once they're old enough to go to bars, their ego inflates to an unmanageable level.

[–]TRP VanguardWhisper1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I almost feel like marriage was created by blue pill men.

Not quite.

Monogamy was invented by betas as an attempt to avoid competing with alphas for women.

[–]Modredpillschool7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And to form a functioning society. Back in the day your farm didn't work without many many kids. The family unit built society.

[–]TRP VanguardWhisper0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This allegation gets tossed around a lot, but I don't think we can claim to be doing red pill thinking if we can't point to evidence to back up our ideas.

I've heard people try to claim religion built civilization because we had religion when we built civilization. This is obviously silly. We also wore shirts while building civilization.

But what makes us so sure that the family unit is any more relevant? Sure it's a way for beta males to get what they want, so it tends to occur a lot.

But how exactly do we show that it is necessary or even useful for civilization-building?

[–]brosephthebroengine4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Here is a paper about that, make up your own mind:

http://www.gwern.net/docs/2012-heinrich.pdf

The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in wealth should favour more polygynous marriages. Yet, monogamous marriage has spread across Europe, and more recently across the globe, even as absolute wealth differences have expanded. Here, we develop and explore the hypothesis that the norms and institutions that compose the modern package of monogamous marriage have been favoured by cultural evolution because of their group-beneficial effects-promoting success in inter-group competition. In suppressing intrasexual competition and reducing the size of the pool of unmarried men, normative monogamy reduces crime rates, including rape, murder, assault, robbery and fraud, as well as decreasing personal abuses. By assuaging the competition for younger brides, normative monogamy decreases (i) the spousal age gap, (ii) fertility, and (iii) gender inequality. By shifting male efforts from seeking wives to paternal investment, normative monogamy increases savings, child investment and economic productivity. By increasing the relatedness within households, normative monogamy reduces intra-household conflict, leading to lower rates of child neglect, abuse, accidental death and homicide. These predictions are tested using converging lines of evidence from across the human sciences.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

The more I watch, the more respect I have for this woman. Seems though, she's too late. We're well down the path. Remember 1 in 10 are worth it. This woman seems like she's worth it. Edit. That 1 in 10 could and probably is a life time for most men. To find that woman.

[–]TRP Vanguardlegendofpasta10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

1 in 10?? That's awfully generous of you, sir... I've dated women for multiple years only to have them jump ship when the opportunity for hypergamy rears its head. I've had women break up with me for a pump n dump and then crawl back in tears, only to be slut shamed and send on their way.

At first glance, you might think 10% "aren't like that" but I assure you, the good ones are just waiting for you to show vulnerability at the same time that a better option shows availability.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the good ones are just waiting for you to show vulnerability at the same time that a better option shows availability

That was my catalyst for taking the red pill. Only it was perceived options as opposed to real options, and then she just got fat. So it did cushion the blow...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. I am being generous. Perhaps 10 in 100. Or, 100 in 1000. I could live my whole life dating 900 woman before I meet one worth the experience.

[–]Modredpillschool6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

1 in 10 are worth it.... Perhaps 10 in 100. Or, 100 in 1000.

ಠ_ಠ

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ha ha. Very funny, I like the eyes. I guess I need help.

[–]Modredpillschool1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

1 in 10 is the same as 10 in 100 and 100 in 1000, they all reduce to 1 in 10.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I realise that. I guess I found it hard to articulate my point. I'll need to find better words.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Why not stick her back in the harem? You have a measure of her now.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just curious who is she? She seems to really understand things from the male perspective and isn't afraid to talk about it. Any idea what her background is? I fully support as its refreshing to see a woman talk about these things.

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

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter