~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Rollo-Tomassi
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Great read as usual, Rollo.
“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”
Awesome, straight from the horse's mouth.
However, I see a little problem there. Even during my darkest bluepill days, I never considered myself even remotely flattered that I got passed over for hot, meaningless sex (or even meaningful sex) but apparently would be considered "good relationship material" somewhere down the road. Probably I am not representative, but I don't think I'm the only one who was thinking that way.
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
What is this?
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Furthermore, that's just the bad girls. Good girls and unicorns need love too! NAWALT!!
Yeah, that was the way I rationalized this too. However, this didn't change the fact that even the "decent" girls (which actually do exist) were every bit as demanding as the sluts, if not more so.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]updock4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It doesn't matter what you like. If you have no other options like most betas you'll take what you can get.
[–]chakravanti932 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Complacency serves old gods.
[–]dropit_reborn2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Even during my darkest bluepill days, I never considered myself even remotely flattered that I got passed over for hot, meaningless sex (or even meaningful sex) but apparently would be considered "good relationship material" somewhere down the road.
When I was 14 or so, one girl told me I'd make a great boyfriend. This confused me, because the circumstances were such that she'd just rejected my fumbling advances. Similarly, I did not take it as a compliment.
[–]TaylorWolf21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
She has to remind women that Beta males actually exist?
rofl they really are invisible
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Nice post. The biggest light bulb for BPers is that women run game too - not shit tests, not power games or drama, but a full-on strategy that "games" the system. When you realize that women game the system, you can finally wash away any of these white knight notions that "gaming" women is wrong or having plates is unfair or whatever. Within the system, only one course of action yields a result that any man should want - and that course of action is being better at the game that other men and women.
[–]1PaulRivers100 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In relationships and dating especially, women take the follow role, and being good in the follow role means gaming the system more than a lead does.
I got over my hesitation to do it when I realized how much of women's behavior and preferences were a result of other women (her mother, other women her age doing the group pressure thing) manipulating here. That's how you get insane things like "I'm 'protecting' my friend from guys by cockblocking everyone" or "I don't do that to meet guys, and I hate guys hitting on me there" at the same thing where she meets her next boyfriend.
You still have a problem though - you can increase your skill in working the game, but at a certain point a lot of skill in working the follow game means you're not improving your lead game. It's like a farmer can be good at call of duty, but he's never going to be as good as the people who do it 12 hour/day. But those people can't run a farm and also play 12 hours a day.
[–]1kingofpoplives12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
What I wonder is, why does someone like Sandburg advise young women to "date them all"? If the end goal is to marry an equalist beta, and that is "sexy in the long run", why put that future at risk for a few years of trivial flings with bad boy cads? I guess in her mind, said equalist sex positive beta would never penalize a woman for those wild years, but everything I know about men says differently.
It seems like women, by constantly propagandizing the female imperative, have pissed in their own drinking water. The domestication of the provider male has gone too far and what is left is little more than a shlubby wallet. They have no chance of sexual fulfillment through marriage to these men, and no chance of reproductive fulfillment through their bad boy flings. The only remaining option is getting part of the equation at different times, but always being doomed to wanting something that is not available. Their bad body days are thrilling, but constantly tinged with the rejection of knowing these men will never commit. They are utterly disposable and replaceable to them. Their hubby days are filled with dominance and superiority, but wretchedly boring and sexually desolate.
It seems like we might be moving towards a dimorphism within the male sex. The strong men becomes cads, the weak men become providers. What disappears is the alpha family man capable of giving women the greatest degree of long term satisfaction.
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, that's the problem - by freely putting out to sexually appealing guys, they encourage those with more liberal standards to never commit (why, if they get all the hot sex for free?) yet at the same time discourage those with more conservative standards to never commit to them.
[–]pursuitofman5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
The more men become aware of women’s hypergamy and strategic sexual pluralism, through women’s open embrace of it or the manosphere, the more pressure the ‘have not’ women will feel to also embrace that openness.
I've read this sentence 20 times and it's not making sense to me. Will it be men pressuring the 'have not' women into embracing the openness of strategic sexual pluralism, or other women? Can someone help clarify this for me please.
[–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi[S] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
IOW, less attractive, less affluent, lower SMV women who's sexual strategy relies on keeping the ugliness of hypergamy a secret from men will be forced into revealing their strategy by the higher SMV women who can afford to openly admit to it.
[–]waytooangry-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I bought a hard copy of your book off amazon. Haven't started reading it, but I'm looking forward to it
© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman22 points23 points24 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]updock4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]chakravanti932 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dropit_reborn2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TaylorWolf21 points22 points23 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]1PaulRivers100 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1kingofpoplives12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pursuitofman5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi[S] 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]waytooangry-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link