~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Fatbaldman
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
sigh
"In the hookup culture we now live in," Hmm...
"it’s pretty obvious that chivalry is completely dead." ...Hmm.
"Maybe my parents were old fashioned," No. They werent.
"maybe growing up in a tight knit Italian family resulted in different values," No, it didnt.
"but I was always preached the value of chivalry and etiquette from the women in my life." You were conditioned to partake in submissive behavior with neither thought nor question.
"From my grandmother to my mother, you better believe I learned my lessons, either verbally or via the wooden spoon." Great - So you were conditioned through pain compliance and despotism. This just gets better and better.
"But why now does it seem like it’s completely impossible for men to do what I would consider the ‘normal’ thing?" Because its not normal. Its incredibly artificial, and thats hurting your world view.
"Dating is done." No, its not. Stop making up lies.
"Seriously, who goes on dates anymore?" Obviously not you.
"It’s all about hooking up, getting a number, grabbing a drink and getting down." No, its not. Thats one scene viewed in isolation.
"I think I’m the only single guy I know that actually takes a girl out to a restaurant on a first date." Thats because the restaurant date thing is a romanticized stereotype.
"There’s a reason for this. If you take a girl out and show her you’re more than some douche looking to just get in her pants, odds are, you’re going to get a second date, at least." And your way of doing that is submitting to her and spending money on her in order to earn her attention span?
"Call me old fashioned," No, heres with the lies again. What youre calling old fashioned hasnt been around for long, and its not very old.
"but a nice dinner is worth the money to get to know someone to some extent." So the only way you can hold down a conversation for long enough to get to know someone is if you buy then dinner? Yeah, right.
"For me, it’s not about the money," It is for her though, you masochist.
"and I get why people are stingy when it comes to going out with people they don’t know." Obviously you dont.
"Look, I get it. Sh*t costs money. But really, what’s the difference?" The difference is, you are dehumanizing yourself to the standard of a wallet for the sake of some woman.
"Treat yourself to a good meal," Again with the reframed lies. Youre treating HER to a FREE meal because shes a girl.
"and if the company is good, why the hell wouldn’t you take a girl out to a nice dinner?" Because people dont get to know people by eating food with them. Eating is not a form of communication.
"All I know is, the more I look around, the less I see men treating women the way that we’re raised to." The way that YOU were raised to, you bigot.
"What happened to paying for dinners and drinks?" It was never common in the first place. Just because you did it and just because you were physically tortured by female authority figures into believing it was the right thing to do does not make it rght. Stop lieing. Stop making up whatever you have to make up to defend your lies.
"What happened to pulling out chairs and holding doors?" Besides the fact that this is another submissive behavior, what happened to it is that your insular bubble got burst.
"What happened to walking on the outside, closest to the street and all that sh*t?" I repeat. Cut out the lies.
"Where did we lose the chivalrous touch?" When did you become so deluded as to believe it was expected and normal in the first place? Did you ever even have a chance to form your own opinions before you were conditioned to believe in this?
"When did it become acceptable to just text a girl, inviting her to come bang?" The beginning of recorded history, and earlier. The remnants of your bubble are all over the place. Or is it just unfathomable to you that that kind of relationship requires a consenting female as well? Or are they so high on your mental hierarchy that its all mens fault?
"Don’t get me wrong. I’m not complaining about those instances," They are all youve complained about, in some form or another.
"I’m just saying, why have we strayed away from what has been established as the norm?" It was never an established norm. It was your established norm, and it was a stereotype.
"I think, in an ever-changing landscape of communication between 140 character tweets, LOLs and ROTFLs, we’ve lost our ability to communicate, altogether." No, we havent. Weve gotten significantly more efficient at it. And how does this bare any relevance whatsoever to anything in the article before this? More lies.
"You go to a noisy bar and expect to get to know someone new, when all you really wind up with is uninteresting small talk." My firsthand experience and the firsthand of everyone i have ever known who has been to a bar speaks differently. Enough with the lies.
"We don’t take the time to get to really know people anymore and that’s why you see relationships and marriages failing at a 50 percent clip." No, it isnt. You are still lieing, you misandrist. Its partly because of people like you who think that getting to know someone means taking them out and buying them food, and being their little pay pig.
"Ultimately, push is going to come to shove here, and I figured it would have happened by now, but for some reason, it has not." What the fuck are you even talking about?
"The real problem here is that women, for one reason or another, have become complacent and allowed men to get away with adhering to the bare minimum." No, they havent. All you do is lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. All in the defense of your sick delusions.
"We no longer have to put in the effort of flowers, chocolates, dates, etc.," More lies. And even so, this is still in the theme of being a pay pig, or a cash cow, or whatever else you want to dub it. My value as a man is not dependent on what i do for women. Get used to it.
"and if we do, we come off as stage-five clingers." No, we dont. We come across as submissive pay pigs.
"I’m not looking for a girlfriend, nor am I looking for a wife. If I take you out to a nice dinner, it’s because I’m a nice guy, and I am looking forward to spending time with you somewhere other than the bedroom." Oh, thats nice. So now what youre saying is that you want to give her money because shes a woman. Because shes a woman, and she is your superior, you pay up. You sir, are pathetic.
"Eventually, I feel that women will wise up and start asking for the things that they deserve," Its called gender feminism or misandry. You are both a male gender feminist as well as a misandrist. They are not entitled to my submission, nor anyone elses. Maybe theyre entitled to yours.
"the things used to be automatic and expected of men, like holding a door, pulling out a chair, and paying for dinners." Bla, bla bla. Lies, submission.
"Until then, men are going to get away with putting in the bare minimum and receiving what we ultimately want anyway – sex." Lies.
"It’s pretty obvious that women own the cards," And now your true colors show even clearer. You are a perfect example of a weak minded egotistical misandrist. I suppose you think youre so much better than 'most men', too.
"and when they start acting like it, they’ll finally start getting dinner from places that don’t deliver." No, they wont. Like the women who do in fact do this, they wont be able to understand why noone wants them any more. Funny that. Have i mentioned that all you do is lie?
...too extreme?
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This doesn't embody TRP at all, it's everything the sub strives against haha.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
tldr: Beta bucks blames something other than himself for his failure with women.
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
Why did it irk you? This guy doesn't buy into hook up culture, he has strict gender rules about dating and is obviously more interested in female company with a possibility of sex than numerous opportunities for access to female genitalia. He's comfortable enough about it.
He acknowledges that the game is different than what his parents taught him but he still prefers to go by the old rules because he sees value in them and is willing to front the costs. He also doesn't like the social costs of hook up culture, wherein sex and reproduction have been decoupled, so people can engage in a larger variety of sex with less necessary attachment. Maybe he likes more intimacy than average in his hook ups, so it seems like a problem to people who don't want it.
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
The problem with that strategy is that it's a failing one. Women will see his behavior as needy or feminine in the context of contemporary society.
The only sure thing about taking women out on dinner dates is it's going to empty your wallet fast, and she'll then proceed to fuck some other guy. Straight pathway to beta-bucks.
Say what you want about hook-up culture, but women are creatures of consensus, who have decided that men who go for hook-ups are better mates. Whether you want a relationship or a ONS, this affects all male-female interactions.
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
It's interesting. So the forecast is that buying into antiquated gender roles will make him more needy and effeminate, to the point that he won't be able to establish a monogamous homelife, even after vetting the woman over the course of more non-sexual interaction time?
Honest questions, not trolling: If you are dating to find a monogamous partner for life: Is the end result of this advice to never entertain a truly romantic deep connection for fear of infidelity? If the answer is no, is the advice to lock women down into a roughly commensurate devoted relationship through a "dominance" that you had to teach yourself after your adolescent psycho-sexual formation, which may not be the best lifelong fit?
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Yes. Women do not respond favorably to that. They expect desirable men to escalate quickly. There is no relationship attached to sex. Men are the gatekeepers to the subsequent formation of a relationship. But if sex doesn't occur early on, chances are she'll rule him out, or they were both low value to begin with.
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Thanks.
Between yours and Tsilant's post, I think I see where I miss the boat on the TRP. You expect most individuals in a group to behave in a statistically predictable manner. This outlook provides consistent results. I tend not to navigate this way because individual people surprise me, and one can wind up pretty bigoted looking at the world and expecting the statistical average. I feel like a western doctor studying Chinese medicine: I see the result, I understand the action of the herbs provided, but the philosophy all goes in the placebo bin, especially when I try to square it against all that schooling in genetics, wildlife behavior, and sexual psychology.
Anyways, thanks for answering, I think I understand the parts of the perspective better.
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
Why do you feel like a western doctor studying Chinese medicine? A western doctor would be using studies based on statistics.
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
He would also incorporate all of that science crap and have reserved doubts about the studies he reads, especially because of design flaws that modern science perpetuates.
Like traditional chinese medicine, the trp is a theory tied together by a philosophy about how the world works first. The theory is then applied to get results that are substantiated by a heady dose of confirmation bias. By discounting evidence from sociology, anthropology and human sexuality to support a claim about reality, there isn't an explicable path that ties the result to the theory. To a person trained in the relevant sciences in which trp treads, the science has a description to explain the same results trp claims support their theory. Like 9/11 conspiracy architecture, we can agree about the end result of that day, but the description of how it all went down is much different.
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
No, most people end up here because they hit evidence first and then look to see what others have come up with.
They then test ideas from here in the field.
If evidence from science worked in the field, you bet your ass we'd be incorporating it.
If you have anything, submit it.
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I doubt I have much of reporting value. I'm a dude in an open relationship with my primary partner, with short term extra-curricular ladies on the side. I approach all of this so much more different than TRP would suggest. I'm just upfront about all that shit within the first hour of meeting someone I'm interested in. I also don't run a formula about establishing dominance and conscientiously using propinquity to my advantage. I just surf that mother fucker out and usually if a girl is interested in me it works and if not - well it's usually due to not being sufficiently "on the relationship menu" or some dis-interesting aspect on one of our ends.
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Women still have to be receptive to you. There's no one preaching a magical voodoo formula for that. At least no honest people.
Nonetheless, there are behaviors that are more attractive and less attractive to women. For most men, this is simply about recognizing that and adopting a strategy that accounts for it, thereby increasing their success.
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
That's the part that keeps bringing me to these forums. How you describe it working is so different from how I describe it working.
I am not saying the results are wrong. I also think some of the theory may hold up if we were clever enough to experiment is such a way to remove the effects of culture.
[–]VZPurp2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
The thing is you can easily go around repelling girls. Just pick up everything under bluepill or beta behavior. Roll up that character real well and then approach these women like that.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Chinese medicine is explicable within the realms of Western Science. Propaganda such as that that acupuncture, for example, cannot be scientifically explained by western science is a lie believed and propagated by those who wont take ten seconds to google it.
Often the ones who cant explain it are the practitioners of Chinese Medicine, who are parroting their teachers.
[–]likechoklit4choklit-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Western science explains most of chinese medicine as placebo.
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not really. It depends on what it is. Chinese medicine that is derived from plants and fungi have active ingredients. Take a look at lingzhi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingzhi_mushroom
Far from an isolated case
I exempted the herbs in the initial qualification. Most of our anti-malarials come from TCM as well.
But, if we must push the analogy further. Western medicine describes the mode of action,(CHEMISTRY) but does not endorse how gall-bladder wind restoring or how spline dampness expelling a plant is. Which seems to be roughly analogous to using revisionist sociobiology that discounts anthropology/diversity/sociology to reap the same results that could just as well been explained by the literature in those fields, all of which is better developed to account for human behavior in cross cultural settings.
At this point, I feel like I'm spinning unnecessary wheels. Maybe I'm too drunk at this hour...
Anyway, I admit, it is egotistical of me to assume that I have this path better figured out than others even if I'm super well read up on the social science and genetic parts of this conundrum. A lot of this needs to be thrown against some more mental rocks before I get any new synthesis. But I'll keep asking questions and try to keep thangs civil.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=chinese+medicine+explained+b+science&oq=chinese+medicine+explained+b+science&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i65l2j69i59j69i61j69i60.4236j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8
"TCM is a pre-scientific superstitious view of biology and illness, similar to the humoral theory of Galen, or the notions of any pre-scientific culture. It is strange and unscientific to treat TCM as anything else. Any individual diagnostic or treatment method within TCM should be evaluated according to standard principles of science and science-based medicine, and not given special treatment."
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You expect most individuals in a group to behave in a statistically predictable manner.
No, I don't expect most individuals in a group to behave in a statistically predictable manner. However, women, as a group, do, and that's why men find their way here and report success back.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp2 points3 points4 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points1 point2 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp4 points5 points6 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp2 points3 points4 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit-1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]VZPurp2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit-2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]likechoklit4choklit0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link