~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Meseglise
[–]vintagegirlgame 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Are you asking if RPW promotes the Alpha Fux/Beta Bux sexual strategy for women? If so then you haven't read the sidebar or browsed the material here. We are about securing a man with mainly alpha traits (and some beta provider qualities) and being 100% loyal to him.
TRP and RPW are very aware that AF/BB happens a lot, but I don't think most women are really aware of or consciously go into this as their strategy. They "settle" for a "nice guy" and they think they are doing the right thing by giving up chasing "bad boys". They are unaware that they will overtime start to resent their nice guy and wish he was more of a bad boy. Not all of them will cheat, some will just brood in dissatisfaction until they decide they are so unhappy, that they need a divorce. And it's likely the first guy they start dating after the divorce will be another alpha bad boy, now that they have their beta provider on the line paying child support. But most of these women are unaware of the true reasons for their behavior. A few are, and if they consciously try to use the AF/BB strategy, then at least they are aware. Most women are just clueless.
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
I was asking more if you see this "strategy" as an inherent behavior in women, and how the users here deal with it. I feel that this is more the way that it is presented on TRP rather than a strategy; would you agree with that view?
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
our whole purpose is to NOT do AFBB, thats what feminist and non RP women do. You didnt read the sidebar. AFBB is a post sexual revolution strategy of splitting the traditional male role into TWO people, something tha was not particularly possible before the sexual revolution and the cock carousel. Women went to their husbands a virgin and if they yearned for some AF, they hadnt had it and probably never would, they had their husbands and no social sanction for divocre and adultery and that was life. Traditional families increased the likelihood youd get AF and BB in the same man, as the traditional roles made men into situational alphas by giving them power over their families
[–]ModernClassicLady 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I've started lurking TRP and this is one of the most mind-boggling theories I've seen on there. There are women who absolutely will not cheat. A guy just needs to raise his standards to find her.
Perhaps only beta men will put up with such crappy women?
[–]needathrowawayplease 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The piece you're missing is that no one ever believes their partner will cheat on them. Of course you don't want to wife up the town bike, but you absolutely can't predict whether a woman is going to be loyal in the long run with 100% accuracy. You can only decrease the odds somewhat by filtering properly and you can always control how you react to any infidelity (zero-tolerance no contact).
They are operating under the assumption that you never will be able to fully assume 100% loyalty and for that reason it's important to never let yourself get too complacent and rest on your laurels, always maintain high enough SMV to have other options if things go south, maintain your ability to cultivate happiness without being dependent on another, etc.
So the operating assumption is that "there are no unicorns" because it's the only way to avoid being caught completely unprepared if your wife leaves you for a bad boy 10 years down the line.
[–]ModernClassicLady 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
It makes sense to always have a back-up plan because it is really hard to trust anybody ever. Women screen men too, but you are right, no one can ever be 100% certain. However, I think both the man and the woman in a relationship need to trust each other not to cheat - if someone constantly assumes their partner is going to cheat on them, it can really add a sense of negativity, pointlessness, and/or hopelessness to the relationship... Which in turn leads to a bad or unpleasant relationship.
Be the best you can be in your relationship so that your partner doesn't feel compelled to cheat, not so that you are ready to kick them to the curb at any moment.
I guess it just seems like so many guys use this specific theory as a rationalization for avoiding getting married when I think it's more of a bad marriage scenario instead of an every marriage occurrence. I think we need to get some statistics on this stuff.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Go read TRP so you understand Where RP is coming from and what it believes about male and female nature
I have been reading and lurking there and I get that this comment is based on hypergamey - which is a concept I do agree with for the most part. I just don't agree that women will necessarily cheat on their husbands. Some women will cheat on their husbands, some won't. All women will be tempted by hypergamy, but I don't think all will act on it. Just like all men will be tempted by a cute 19 year old, but not all men will act on their temptations.
I, for one, would never sleep with a man outside of a committed relationship. I would never risk messing up my comfortable, happy relationship by doing that. It just seems dumb to me. It seems like something a woman would do if she just acts on her animal urges instead of thinking about them.
I can look around the circle of women that I know and point out people who have lived up or would live up to the stereotype. However, I can also point out woman who are in deeply committed relationships and would never dream of doing such a thing to their husbands.
[–]persistencepays 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How widespread is cheating? Studies have shown 1 in 25 fathers may not be the biological parent of the child they think is theirs. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2005/aug/11/childrensservices.uknews
It just seems dumb to me.
Oh, it is dumb. Check out /r/adultery sometime.
[–]A-Promise -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It is inherent (biology and evolutionary psychology) for a woman and a man to be sexually attracted to a partner who seems to provide high quality genetic material which is why grooming is important in being sexually attractive on an animal level.
This explains men wanting to spread their seed among young (fertile) attractive (genetically healthy) women, and women wanting children from the genetic material of 'alpha' (successful enough to not be at the bottom of the food chain) and attractive (genetically healthy) men.
It is inherent on the base level of being sexually aroused by a healthy young partner rather than someone with a lopsided face who has lost their hair and weighs as much as two people should weigh. The rest, in my opinion, is society's role.
In some cultures, commitment and monogamy, dedication to your family and fidelity are valued and taught. In others, the attitude of many sexual partners without commitment being equated to empowerment and status is taught.
That is why some women and men get married and despite having the base instinct of finding people outside of their marriage sexually appealing on an animal level, do not find them worth pursuing because they have been socialized to see only their spouse as an attractive option for sex and commitment. They don't play away and they don't trade up when someone with 'better prospects' becomes an 'available option'.
I think the cultures above are not taken into consideration in general red pill theory, because those aren't the women who they are trying to 'game'. Yes, a certain bag of tricks will get you sex from a group of women who freely sleep with anyone who can flash an expensive watch and has a six pack, but there are women who that 'game' won't work on.
Socialization speaks for a lot. If you bring up a girl to value fidelity and to be impressed by a man's huge commitment rather than his huge biceps and wallet, then that inherent instinct doesn't become behaviour. In a society where we are not living in scarcity and survival is for all, not just for the fittest, we do not need to rely on our base instincts so they do not translate into behaviour.
If you raise a boy to value sexual experience in the context of intimacy, love and commitment, I believe that he will be faithful in a relationship regardless of what outside of it 'tempts' him. My opinion, of course.
[–]siegristrm -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think you missed the point of TRP entirely... TRP trumps society.
[–]A-Promise 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
I get the point of red pill theory. Society plays a big role in regulating or encouraging people's base sexual desires as well. Culture plays a big part, you must admit. Also, people aren't total slaves to their biology. Cheating is a decision that people make. It is possible to keep it in your pants if you value fidelity, if you value fidelity.. That is why some types of people are more likely to be unfaithful than others, and why some demographics are more likely to divorce than others, as well as why some demographics have more/'better' sex than others.
[–]siegristrm 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Right, TRP is trying to bring men back to the society we once had of strong, confident men. Society has been the problem. Yes, some cultures are different, but most of our physiology is the same :-)
[–]Iva3442 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Alpha traits and beta traits happen on a continuum, and a guy should be capable of displaying both behaviors. A pure alpha is going to give you the hottest sex of your life along with the 40 other girls he's juggling, and the moment you develop crow's eyes, he'll abandon you. A pure beta will be loyal and stable and so insufferably boring that you'll be begging him to abandon you. One is bad for creating a stable home in which you can successfully raise a family, one is bad for creating any spark of desire whatsoever.
So, you gotta find a man who can cross into both realms when the situation calls for it. Beta in the streets, alpha in the sheets, so to speak.
[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
women are biologically inclined to (and thus often) seek out a "beta" guy for a long-term relationship/marriage
Uhm... Not exactly. Women are biologically inclined to seek commitment from men, but not necessarily "beta" men. Since a woman's desire to find commitment is so great, they would rather settle than be single. This often leads to relationships with betas, which leads to unhappiness, which leads to resentment/divorce/infidelity. Part of what we learn here is how to be a good woman, so that we don't have to settle for a beta, and have happy relationships.
The vast majority of the women here are in relationships with alphas, and thus are incredibly happy, have no desire to stray... Etc.
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Isn't the idea there though that a "beta" guy would be more selfless, and thus provide you with more in terms of finance/resource?
Do you think most women would take this additional support, and seek more exciting/rewarding romantic and sexual adventures extra-maritally?
[–]goddessof67 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I think this is why women are attracted to "betas". I think they truly believe in their minds that they would be happy with "betas" and had no malicious intent towards their beta husbands at the outset. Then things just "happen". I don't women know themselves why they do the things that they do, except that it felt good or felt right at the time.
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You wouldn't consider this a conscious behavior then? But would say that it holds true as an unconscious behavior? If you found yourself in such a situation, would you continue the relationship with your "beta" counterpart, while being unfaithful, or would you immediately terminate the relationship?
[–]goddessof67 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not for many women, would it be a planned, conscious thing. I think redpillwomen here on this forum are generally very self aware and introspective, so would not tend to be the ones drifting haphazardly into these sorts of situations. One the other hand, I'm pretty sure many redpill women here would not consciously choose reproductive strategies such as AF/BB, for moral and ethical reasons. If in the unlikely scenario that they find themselves in this situation, I think many of them would do the right thing by their BB partners.
There seems to be an interesting difference I am noticing with redpill women and redpill men. There seems to be a far far greated proportion of redpill men who will go all out to get what they want, without any concern about other people or any consequences for other people.
I wonder why that is. Maybe I am totally wrong and redpill women can, and are just as amoral as many redpill men.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Again, you are missing how it works. The woman has no intention in all of this but to secure commitment. If she is not ATTRACTED to her "BB", she is loosely held and easily poached by a more attractive man. It s a woman attraction that binds her, not her vows, thats why it used to be hard to get divorced, because of female branch swinging, man left up to their own devices would collect wives,not abandon old ones
You are reading the intentionality of how AFBB works backwards in time. A woman WANTS commitment from alphas, she cant GET it on the cock carousel, she is then forced by her aging out of the market to "settle" for BB. It is not her FIRST choice, her first choice would be AFBB in one man, the sexual revolution ruined that for women and removed their capacity to submit to such a man anyway, which is way she can no longer get commitment from them at her peak
[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I suppose that's one way to think about it, and many women do think that way and end up with betas because of that. An alternative way to think about it would be that an alpha has more to give.
For instance: someone might be willing to be a plate for a celebrity because even as a plate, they would have more privileges and status than the wife of an accountant. The accountant might be more willing to give, but the celebrity has more resources and more to give, so he can be more attractive. The celebrity doesn't have to be as generous, because him giving a little is more than the accountant giving a lot.
[–]PowerHuffGirl5 points 11 years ago* [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link
Would you agree that this is a good plan, if carried out well?
No. Unfaithfulness is not okay at all and we don't advocate that it is okay around here either.
I have never implemented such an idea and I wouldn't because I don't want to hurt my partner. I would hate being cheated on, so I won't do it to someone else. It's like asking "Have you ever murdered someone? If not, why not?". Of course not, doing it would be immoral.
No offense taken. Nothing wrong with being curious and honest. :)
[–]Meseglise[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
I didn't mean a good plan for you emotionally, I meant a good plan from an evolutionary standpoint, in terms of success of your potential offspring.
It can't be all that good good evolutionary wise either because such behaviour probably spell societal collapse in the longer term. There does not appear to be any mammalian species that practive the kind of reproductive strategy which you describe here. The models are usually : - female promiscuity with multiple males at the one time, leading to high infant mortality because male or female members of the community do not provide a high level of care for offspring of the group. What they lose in infant mortality, they make up in infant numbers. - polygyny where an alpha male or a group of alpha males have reproductive rights over all the females, so essentially the alphas are the primary support of their own offspring. It must be noted that the alpha males are genetically related or else very closely bonded since birth or childhood. - matriachical societies where males sporadically mate with the females but provide no support to their offspring whatsoever. The female community provides support to offspring of all the females in the group. - lifetime single partner monogamous arrangements where both parents contribute equally to supporting their joint offspring, usually seen in birds There is absolutely no animal organisation in nature apart from humans where another male provides primary support for an offspring that is not theirs (knowingly or not). Societies with these sort of arrangements have never been stable (eg. matrilineal arrangements in Africa where uncles support their sister's offspring), particularly in the face of hardship.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Evolutionary strategy was afbb in the same man. Modern tech civilization allowed women the freedom to pursue a dual strategy so as to avoid submitting to a man
[–]PowerHuffGirl1 points 11 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
Oh, so you mean from an amoral standpoint? Then yes, it is a very efficient way to guarantee that your offspring has the best genetic material (from the alfa father) and is also provided for (by the beta "father").
Securing commitment from an alfa male is always the most efficient strategy (an alfa has the best genetics & the best ability to provide), but it's also the most difficult one to achieve.
Having a child with an alfa man without securing his commitment is the easiest choice, but it exposes the woman to the risks of having to raise the child without additional support from a mate.
The AF/BB strategy is the perfect compromise when securing an alfa isn't realistically achievable for a woman, so women are inclined to do that (when morality doesn't get in the way). On here, we try to make women aware of this inclination that they have and we discourage them from choosing this strategy.
[–]goddessof67 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
From a strictly amoral standpoint, why would we want to discourage this strategy ? Isn't not our business what other people do, if it does not affect us, our friends or our families ? There has been a raging controversy over in TRP whether or not there should be issues of morals and ethics entering into discussions of that forum. Is this something we want to explore here in redpillwoman ?
[–]Meseglise[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
If an "alpha" may be secured by a woman, then surely the infidelity still applies (in an amoral, evolutionary manner of speaking), in that a long-term source of support/resources is provided for more genetically diverse offspring. I used a "beta" as an example for the provider in the OP as I assumed this would be both: a) easier to obtain b) more giving (towards the woman and her offspring)
Would you say that infidelity (in general) is (amorally, from an evolutionary viewpoint) be the best course of action for a woman who has secured a long-term partner?
If this did make women happy, would you advocate it? If this was your evolutionary role, what was best for you, and what would make you happiest (I'm not saying it holds true for you, or any other particular individual, but hypothetically (or for women who are this way inclined)) would you endorse it (given that optimal fulfillment/happiness/biological role-filling is mostly what TRPW is about)?
We don't endorse this. We endorse monogamous LTR that are highly cognizant of male needs and male nature
Yes. Evolutionary strategy can only be undertaken, and be successful within a particular societal context. It does not make sense to talk incessantly about amoral because as humans, we don't function and survive within an amoral context. Meseglise, you are talking in hypotheticals and here at redpill, we deal in the strictly practical. We work with reality as it really is, hence redpill. You amoral universe is a fantasy which is on the same level as bluepill which seeks to operate outside the confines of what actually happens and works in real life.
It's not a plan, it's unfettered female nature
[–]lostatsea93 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not necessarily proud of it or bragging, but before my now alpha significant other, I found myself dating a classic beta.
He took a job across the country, because thats where he could find a job. I was not moving to be with him, as he told me that after his 1 year internship, he would get into grad school close to me and we would then continue the relationship and be together.
Heres what happened. I remained faithful to him to a T. I went to weddings by myself. I made his trips home about him. I spent my years from 22-24 completely off the market and working my my life and career, while he worked on his far away, and we did the best we could to maintain the spark in our relationship.
I didn't find it challenging not to find interest elsewhere until...
He told me that he didn't get into grad school anywhere, and "wasn't sure what he was going to do". Now, dont get me wrong. I know grad school is tough. But it thoroughly shook my confidence in him that he didn't have a plan B, nor was he confident about the direction his life was going to go. How could he ever be confident in the life we would share together? would I always be hoping/wishing for him to do the right things to take care of his job so he could take care of his family? Those were my thoughts.
Again, I am not proud about what happened next, but it is what it is and I have made peace with it. I then started seeking outside attention in outside relationships. I was honest with him and told him I was interested in dating other people, as I didn't see his set out plan for us to be together coming to fruition. I quickly found a lot of attraction to a strong alpha. This alpha did NOT have the comparable job, family, up bringing or status to the beta I was dating before.
But his dominance and confidence was unbelievably desirable to me and I put more faith in a man who didn't fit into my "check list" because he was alpha and dumped the beta that checked all the boxes.
I know everyone has to find their way in life and has a right to navigate through those different life paths..... But I want/need a man that doesn't just check the boxes and can make me feel confident about a life with him. I need a man who makes me feel like a woman.
TL;DR: Yeah, its unfortunately a true desire (at least it was for me) and whether you act on taking it to the next level or not is up to you.
Very self aware and honest, good job
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]vintagegirlgame 10 points11 points12 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ModernClassicLady 2 points2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]needathrowawayplease 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]ModernClassicLady 1 points1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]ModernClassicLady 1 points1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]persistencepays 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]A-Promise -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]siegristrm -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]A-Promise 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]siegristrm 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Iva3442 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points8 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]goddessof67 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meseglise[S] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]goddessof67 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PowerHuffGirl5 points [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meseglise[S] 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]goddessof67 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PowerHuffGirl1 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]goddessof67 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meseglise[S] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goddessof67 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lostatsea93 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link