Men are hypogamous, and love opportunistically.

Heard about redpill, couldn't quite get a grasp on it as people threw around various definitions of what it was, so I decided to go to those places, sosuave, redpill forums, read the book of pook and rollo's blog, etc…
Reading the stuff about hypergamy and gender essentialism (women by default are submissive, men dominant, etc.)
It seemed like this is equally true:
Men are hypogamous, and love opportunistically.

Where they say men love idealistically, such as looks + personality. And not what you provide.
You could, based off their own words say:
Men are hypogamous, they prefer the submissive/girl with less power, who they can control to maximize their chances of reproduction.
Look at history, how men have controlled women's sexuality.

"Yeah but my husband, my boyfriend, I'm not like that"
That's because he couldn't change you.
That's because he figured he had no chance and took what he could, opportunistically.
That's because he was conditioned by society (nice guys conforming to the female imperative, blue pill guys.)

"But not all men truly want an easily controlled woman"
Ah, they want the strong girl who they can put in a cage, fearing that the submissive girl would easily be swayed by another alpha.

This is why we see an increase in men learning how to manipulate women to get sex, or Passport bros.
Society has relinquished it's hold on women, they are not submissive anymore, beta men gave away the strong foundation men had set up to hamper hypergamy that was a threat to men's reproduction and resources. Which now is threatened by child support, taxes and the like.

"instead of making use of the little complaisances we have for their weakness to redouble their obedience and fidelity to us, they aspire to become our equals; ought we not, in justice to ourselves and for instruction to them, to show them that it has been owing to our own generosity more than to any right they claim, that we have not hitherto treated them only as our less useful slaves?"

RP argue that the natural disposition of women is submissive, which is convenient for man who's natural disposition is dominant, to control her hypergamy and ensure his reproduction success.
They teach you how to get past her hypergamy, be the alpha, so she will be submissive for you, which is what she truly wants.
Rid yourself of your blue pill conditioning, become a man, become alpha so she will submit and you can remold her into your image, the boss girl and broken women are a waste of time.
Etc.

"Oddly, I could never define woman. Nothing was there. The more I looked into the core of woman, the more I saw the spirit of man.
When asked on his success, he will credit the woman and say that she backed him. How painful it will be when he realizes that almost any woman under his influence would do this!
Women reflect you. As you think, she becomes. The more sexual influence you have on a woman, the more you can remold her. You can make her exercise (even if its the last thing she wants to do), make her enjoy mathematics and quantam physics, and even turn her into a born again virgin. This feminine remolding is what men mistake for love."

Women hypergamy, resources/status, increasing reproductive success. Their love therefore, opportunistic.
Men hypogamy, controllable woman, increasing reproductive success. Their love therefore, opportunistic.

The question is, isn't this just as reasonable assertion?

EDIT: Just like to point out, to those who didn't catch on. I don't subscribe to the RP stuff, nor this.