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
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead

      • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • 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 Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Men: You're Fire. Providers Need Not Apply

empyblessing
August 21, 2013
29 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Archived from /r/TheRedPill

r/TheRedPill is a subreddit for discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/TheRedPill archive

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: You're Fire. Providers Need Not Apply
Author

empyblessing
Upvotes 29
Comments 61
Date August 21, 2013 6:03 PM UTC
(12 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1ktgyk/men_youre_fire_providers_need_not_apply/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/men-youre-fire-providers-need-not-apply.233339
https://theredarchive.com/post/233339
Red Pill terms in post
provider
Top posts by empyblessing

Stop asking for permission ! That IS BETA.

21 upvotes
July 18, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

New Study: men are smarter than women

15 upvotes
July 18, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Do women literally feel tingles?

12 upvotes
July 16, 2013
/r/RedPillWomen

Would you marry your perfect man if he was unemployed?

10 upvotes
July 3, 2013
/r/RedPillWomen

Red Pill Dating. Interested?

10 upvotes
July 18, 2013
/r/RedPillWomen

Are guys with tattoos attractive?

6 upvotes
July 19, 2013
/r/RedPillWomen

Is the ego the hamster?

5 upvotes
June 20, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

On taboo, sex, violence, porn & prostitution (MGTOW Video)

2 upvotes
July 29, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Comments

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

Interesting article.

tl;dr version - Women are now able to provide for themselves. This makes men less useful for them because even though she's got her material needs met she's still looking for a provider.

This just sets the bar impossibly high for many men making an average living (most betas). So women ask where all the good men are? Truth is they're in the same income bracket or lower. The sad thing is that if she does go and get a man who makes less than her that is a recipe for divorce in the long run anyway. Damned if you do, Damned if you dont.

I fully expect to see a huge increase in MGTOW either consciously or unconsciously in the near future. Many men who would be betas or beta orbiters will just drop out of the market because effectively pussy will be pricing itself out of the market for those guys.

[–]empyblessing[S] 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

There already is an increase in MGTOW in deed if not in spirit. I was speaking to a man today. He's good looking who dates frequently. He's blue pill, nice guy stuff, but gets girls because of looks and money. Anyway, this guy out of nowhere started talking about women not worth marrying and that men were useless.

I think part of MGTOW are incels looking to justify their life. Fine by me. I don't shame men for not getting laid. But there are other legit marriage quality men who are not signing up. I expect nothing but infantilism from women if MGTOW goes mainstream. They'll run to daddy government like they always do to fix the problem.

[–]bludnthunder 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But there are other legit marriage quality men who are not signing up.

It comes down to "what do men get out of marriage/relationships" compared to "what do men have to contribute towards marriage/relationships"

As men have to risk and contribute more and more, and benefit less and less from marriage, men with options will continue to drop out in spades. Would I get married if I received benefit proportionate to my contribution? Absolutely. Is the juice currently worth the squeeze? Fuck no.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

For some reason you comment reminded me of a story about the aftermath of that big earthquake in China. Apparently the government there was assigning widows and widowers to marry each other and live together.

[–]empyblessing[S] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I don't think they'll assign wives to men. Though I don't know what the state will do once the population continues to decline and the debt and liabilities continue to increase as it's happening in Japan. If I think about it optimistically, I hope the stagnant fertility of western women will be the push that we need for ectogenesis. Realistically, feminists will get whatever they can out of men. Probably just increase the amount they tax men and extend lifelong social care for women.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Ya, I don't think that edge case is remotely applicable in this situation. I just was reminded of it.

I was suddenly reminded of another story. There was this endangered bird and there only 3 specimens left in the world at a single zoo. 2 male and 1 female. They put them together (assigned them you could say) hoping they would breed. The 2 males became gay with each other. No eggs were had and they died out.

[–]empyblessing[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You may be right. It makes me think of "she's too good for everyone."

[–]encore_une_fois 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That's hilarious. A citation would be awesome if you happened to remember enough to find it. One of those stories where you feel like "annnnd, that species deserved to die out; evolution works!"

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This isn't the story I was thinking of, but it is similar. Google turns up a surprising number of hits on this. It is apparently a common problem to get gay endangered birds:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/2011/11/10/should-gay-endangered-penguins-forced-mate/

This is just plain scary... I wonder if this sort of things happens with mammals as well to some extent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/birds-are-becoming-gay-fr_n_791541.html

[–]encore_une_fois 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hilarious; thanks!

I've definitely heard theories that homosexuality can be an evolutionary edge to a population which is looking to maintain rather than grow in size. But when it comes to an endangered species, it strikes me as a pretty clear sign they're looking to sign-off from life. Like the Shakers [sic].

[–]empyblessing[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

An increase in homosexuality could be a result of "overpopulation" since there are greater numbers of gays found within cities. Desmond Morris points this out in his book "The Human Zoo." Humans in cities often display the same behaviors as animals in captivity, one of them being a confused sexuality.

[–]encore_une_fois 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Makes sense. I should try to get a copy of that book sometime. Thanks.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I'm sure there are some incels that look at it that way.

I expect nothing but infantilism from women if MGTOW goes mainstream. They'll run to daddy government like they always do to fix the problem.

LOL, what is the government going to do? Force men and women to get married and have sex? :P

[–]Crackerjacksurgeon 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

No, but they could tax single men. It's been done elsewhere.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ChaoticParadox 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're a god damn genius.

[–]empyblessing[S] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no tax benefit to marriage. That's a myth. There is a tax penalty to being married and filing jointly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_penalty

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How much would this actually gain you? Is it illegal to marry for this specific purpose? Would you be at risk of losing half your stuff, even with a prenup?

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes, but I'm sure that a tax on single men would not pass constitutional muster and would get shot down very quickly. Now if they were to enact a singles tax which applies to men and women then it might work and would be a wealth transfer mechanism for the feminist agenda. However, we all know emotionally how single women will react to a tax on being single which will prevent them from doing so anyway.

[–]lepillrouge 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Obamacare is a tax on single men.

From now on, you're being forced to subsidize maternal care, free birth control, and IVF treatments, when all any member of this community under 40 needs is a catastrophic plan if you're hit by a bus (which should run $10 a month or so.)

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes it is...

But I'd rather subsidize birth control than the other stuff since it's cheaper.

Also under 40's probably should get a comprehensive plan because getting it now means it'll be cheaper down the line when you actually need many of the things covered.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

It's been done elsewhere.

Link?

[–]Crackerjacksurgeon 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/02/24/when-the-romans-tried-to-save-marriage/

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Wow, thanks man.

[–]Crackerjacksurgeon 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

You might also like to check out childlessness taxes in Soviet Russia. not the same thing, but it's a similar legislation of family life.

[–]Rumble_in_the_Jungle 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Soviet Russia wasn't the best at PR. Nowadays countries that do the same thing call it "tax break for families with children."

[–]empyblessing[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually, there's no family tax break, not for marriage anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_penalty

[–]gopher_glitz 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Seeing as how having children gives you a tax credit, isn't that childless people subsidizing those with kids?

[–]Crackerjacksurgeon 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

:)

exactly.

[–]timdesuyo1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And I'm kinda ok with this. Education and child healthcare are huge expenses that should be born communally.

[–]AboveAFC1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No only that, but you're paying for those kids to go to school, get fed, and everything else that goes with them. If it were truly fair, you'd pay more when you have kids, since they burden the system.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Wow

[–]empyblessing[S] 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They won't tax men directly. Instead, they'll likely tax everyone but only offer social programs for women. There is already a de facto man tax. Every hospital for women is a tax on men. Every government program for women is a tax on men.

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Look at that, you're right. Nicely done.

[–]AnasRexGottfried 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I expect they'll try to go back to their shaming tactics about men not wanting to marry them because it's all they know. Only it's not working anymore so eventually they'll end up old and with cats living a life of regret that they deserve.

[–]empyblessing[S] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

men aren't going to marry fat women no matter what. all the shaming won't work. women are getting fatter. take a look at any online dating site with the large women filter turned off.

[–]gopher_glitz -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

I'd really like to see how things play out if MGTOW goes mainstream. However, I think the less incels/betabux having kids the better.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thats great until high-birthrate religious fundamentalists perform a demographic coup.

[–]gopher_glitz 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

high-birthrate religious fundamentalists perform a demographic coup.

With masses of blind leading the blind those that see become Kings.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

less incels/betabux having kids the better.

Most of these guys make the the most important technical and work contributions. That really isn't great for society. But fuck it.

[–]gopher_glitz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

If you're incel you not having kids anyway. This also wrongly assumes that there is some natural law that states only ugly beta types can be smart or make great technical contributions.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There is- it's the fact that all the time you might spend pursuing girls or working out, they're coding.

[–]gopher_glitz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Same could be said about taking shits in the bathroom vs your socks next to your workstation, vacations, hygiene, proper meals etc. I think even people who code are probably much more productive and happy if they are getting T&A on the regular, relaxed, and put together.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not only that but being able to code or do other 'brain' type tasks/jobs does not preclude someone from having social skills.

[–]empyblessing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Tesla and Da Vinci were both total celibates.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A lot of the ones who make contributions are. And in past arrangements, they could more reasonably be expected to have kids.

[–]empyblessing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The only problem is that a lot of incels are the high IQ autistic types who contribute greatly to the species.

[–]gopher_glitz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Well if they really are incles they aren't having kids are they?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Every existing incel was the product of an unbroken line of reproductively successful men.

[–]gopher_glitz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

reproductively successful men.

True enough, but I wouldn't consider knocking up an ugly washed up prostitute or hideously ugly women as 'successful'.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Natural selection doesn't consult your opinions. Genghis Khan was probably born to some hideously ugly sow somewhere, and he's probably the most alpha man in history.

[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Or, like Sweden, men will simply marry more foreign women.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Swedish men have the right idea... Considering the number of feminazis in Sweden.

[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are now able to provide for themselves. This makes men less useful for them because even though she's got her material needs met she's still looking for a provider.

Men are needed to prop women up via the tax system since men still pay a majority of taxes and women receive a majority of resources from the government. Affirmative action policies, while definitely not needed in college, not only are still here but getting worse. Women will only be "independent" as long as the government can successfully rearrange the deck chairs on the sinking ship.

To keep the sinking ship afloat a bit longer, they instituted massive wealth-transfer schemes like nofault divorce to finance "starter marriages." This keeps the money coming in, with the government as the middleman taking a cut.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Alpha behavior all day, even if you can provide well - which really just gives you more ammo for fulfilling your sexual desires (i.e. it makes for additional bait).

On the other hand, beta behavior is a ticket to long term misery. The modern woman makes this very obvious.

[–]empyblessing[S] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

For most men they're both tickets to long term misery. Don a facade of alpha for the rest of your life while your wife does what exactly? What is her sacrifice? The answer is nothing. There is no incentive to marriage and a man holds no authority within it. It doesn't matter if you present a mask of command to your wife. It is a paper tiger.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, I was not referring to a wife, but life and relationships in general. Alpha behavior leads to a much more enjoyable life. But yes, if you screw that up by handing over your life and power to a woman, there's a very high chance of misery regardless.

[–]jakethesnake76 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That Dr. Faust is hilarious , and very perceptive in a big picture sort of way.

[–]gopher_glitz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

When men and women (people) have everything they need/want the only thing most of them want from the other sex is genuine sexual intimacy. Since men have almost always provided for themselves it's all they've wanted from women for a long long time. Now since women can provide for themselves it's the only thing they want from men. Not just any man, an Alpha man with superior genes. What is the most obvious and blatant signaler for superior genes? The way you look.

[–]empyblessing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, I understand why women reject a lot of men. Most men make no effort at all to improve themselves. They've no standards of value. They dress like slobs are fat and unkempt, slouch, can't speak properly, have no personalities, so I do empathize with some of the women when they can't find good dates.

Another factor is that a woman assumes she can date a man because she fucked him. This is wrong. A man will fuck a woman he has no plans on dating.

A lot of game is really basic stuff. Show off your value. Increase your value.

[–]gopher_glitz -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Another factor is that a woman assumes she can date a man because she fucked him. This is wrong. A man will fuck a woman he has no plans on dating.

This goes both ways.

Game is really basic stuff but just because you are fit, tall, dress nice and have good qualities doesn't mean it's enough if you're not good looking.

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