~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
[deleted]
[–]widec4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I think there's a lot of confusion about the term AWALT. It doesn't mean that all women are the same. It just means that all women share a similar set of traits. All women will be hypergamous, emotional, and have a dual mating strategy, among other traits. They can have wildly varying personalities and lifestyles, but their core instincts will always remain the same.
[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They lay dormant until given an opportunity
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Not really... and to my credit (grabbing my own horn to toot ;) I do statistics for a living... specifically genetics research/bioinformatics which does rely heavily on Bayesian statistical models.
If one's goal is to never be hurt/let down/screwed in the family courts/etc etc etc.... then AWALT is a perfect way to proceed.
If however you'd like to have a family/LTR/whatever then you have to start with understanding that in fact AWALT CANNOT be true. The divorce rate is not 100% and in fact there is at least one sex filled fantastic marriage/LTR that does exist. I can attest to exactly one I'm aware of in the last 40 years... and no it's not mine!
Now you might argue it's as rare as a lottery ticket and you'd be a fool to buy one. Maybe... but never the less... the statement NO ONE EVER WINS the lottery is simply not true.
If you want a successful LTR relationship then what you want to do (mr fancy pants statistics ;) is actually this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_analysis
And in that you'd find some combination of indicators that would likely point out a person that is LLTBLT (Less likely to be like that ;) and there is no shortage of opinion on that.
In fact AWALT sounds sort of idiotic because as we all learned in school... if it's true false and the question contains all,always or never it's probably a false statement.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
but wouldnt we all laugh at the guy who said "i'm going to work really hard to win the lottery" just as much as we would laugh at the guy who said "i'm going to work really haed to find an LTR?"
[–]adrixshadow0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That implies TRP LTR not existing.
We already know what a good LTR strategy is.
[–]trplurker 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
OP only has a superficial understanding of AWALT. When we say AWALT we are referencing female biology, specifically her mating drive and sexual selection instincts. The nature of women to be hypergamous and select for subjective status above all else. It's used as a replacement for the Disney-esque fantasy of "one true love forever!". It doesn't mean every women has the exact same personality but that given any situation any women can be made to do something by simply altering the status or risk of any given situation.
That perfect home maker attractive 30yo mother who's been happily married to her husband of ten years can be made into a raging slut by any male of sufficiently high status. Have someone of Justin Timberlake's or Ludacris's status start giving her sexual attention and she would instantly flip and all that effort and investment into her marriage would mean nothing. You can lower the status bar by lowering the risk, instead of needing someone of celebrity status you can instead introduce the probability of her husband and family not finding out. Now the man just needs to be an attractive male with some financial success or have solid pick up skills who is subjectively higher status then her husband, since she feels the husband won't find out she's more likely to experiment with a branch swing.
Basically AWALT just means "don't let your guard down" and "don't expect unconditional loyalty".
[–]WardlyHasted 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I'm genuinely curious why you say I only understand AWALT superficially. I am completely aware that it refers to a woman's hypergamous nature and her biological impulses.
My post was not about defining AWALT, but why AWALT needs to be your default frame of reference.
I used some statistical theories to make my point so perhaps it wasn't as clear as I had hoped. My point was to never fall for the "Sally fallacy". If you have internalized what AWALT entails, then you should know that even a woman like Sally can have these tendencies.
This is why I used the first example involving the programs at a university. If you know that 70% of graduates at a particular university are business students and only 1% are arts graduates, you shouldn't bet that a graduate is an arts student -- even if someone would describe them as "artsy". If you know that AWALT, you shouldn't be surprised if a woman acts a certain way.
I'm not trying to be defensive, just looking for some constructive feedback.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
TL;DR version: don't let an anecdote make you think that you've found an exception to the rule.
[–]mrp3anut2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You seem to have the same surface level understanding of AWALT as most guys here. You actually believe that all women are one failed shit test away from getting gangbanged by 75 men while you are at work.
Awalt means all women have the same basic instincts on some level. It does not mean all women are driven by them to the same degree. What this means is that Sally is a good bet for an LTR because the effort required to maintain frame with her is reasonable. She may still leave if you gain 200lbs, start crying when you see sad puppies, and generally turn into a beta bitch. Surprisingly guys here think its aweful that a woman will leave if you change after marriage yet have no problem ditching a girl if she changes after marriage.
TL:DR; Quit extrapolating shit out way beyond its scope and you will be fine.
[–]2popthatpill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fascinating post, but i don't know why this is so complicated to people. NAWALT is two things:
First, it's a shit test: are you alpha enough to see through my protestations? If not, you don't get it, and hence you're a beta.
Second, it's designed to get you on the defensive: the more time and effort you waste bogged down in apologias for your position, the less time and effort you have to spare to spread RP crimethink.
So: never act defensive when you AWALT, and treat NAWALT like you'd treat any other shit test.
[–]NeoreactionSafe1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
The real question is whether Hypergamy inherently means that a woman is incapable of monogamy. The answer is that Hypergamy is only active when certain conditions exist:
The man is proven to be objectively of low rank.
The man is proven to be subjectively of low rank.
. In either case the woman's Hypergamy must reassess her position and this prepares the way for a possible branch swing.
If your authentic rank is good (you are the real deal as Alpha) and you also do not fail internally as being of high rank then you should be fine.
Women don't want to jump... they dread doing it... but they do what they must.
[–]1Revo_Luzione1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This one is dicey--women are not known for objectivity. In fact, an argument can be made that game & PUA stuff specifically works because it trips the subjective triggers (most of them) of high SMV.
[–]NeoreactionSafe2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I agree entirely. PUA is all about maintaining the subjective experience for the woman so that she sees you as above her.
But there are times when your objective rank will become exposed.
If you used PUA and described yourself as a billionaire and it's proven you clean Porta Potties for a living it's not going to matter how good your Game is, your Game is over.
what kind of rape would that be classified as?
[–]1oldredder0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
AWALT: it's not difficult. You need
a) eyes
b) lack of denial
If you can't accomplish A or B then AWALT will be a challenge but so will a shit-ton of other things in life.
[–]moonmania-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
This is fucking retarded. The feminine, moral, n-count of 1, cooking, cleaning, wants-to-be-a-mother Sally is perfect relationship material. She sounds like a dream come true, and you'd be an absolute fool to falsely equate her to Krystal, the tattooed, rude, masculine, dick-hopping whore-slut who puts out to anybody with a smartphone and a Tinder profile.
Here's the deal, dude. Human logic is imperfect. It's messy. Our psychology has layers upon layers of biases, fallacies, heuristics, and everything else. Why? Because it's evolutionarily adaptive. When you succumb to confirmation bias, it's because there's a good evolutionary reason to do so. No true Scotsman? Same thing. Nostalgia, hindsight, overconfidence, illusory superiority, above-average effect, exposure effect, projection, etc.? Yeah, it's a chorus of a million of your ancestors screaming at you do this or this or that and pass us on because fuck you that's why. Your genes know what's best for you, but if they don't then they'll be weed-whacked and your line will end with you.
It's all evolution—it's all natural selection. Civilization, money, titles, status, democracy, Freedum, royalty, technology, communism, the Soviets, the goddamned Space Race...it's all for sex. And sex is for babies. And babies are for the perpetuation of the selfish, selfish genetic code. Because that's the real manifest destiny.
"Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
The ancients knew what they were talking about.
As an addendum, I can't believe I keep getting sucked into trying to answer this bullshit. What a time sink.
[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points 11 years ago | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]moonmania1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Groups and individuals are not the same. If you judge them in the same fashion, you may need to reevaluate yourself.
Sally:
Self-interested? Check.
Basic biological motives similar to all women? Check.
A good cook? Check.
A great mother? Check.
A moral person? Check.
Careful about the men she associates with? Check.
Krystal:
A good cook? Doubtful.
A great mother? Nope.
A moral person? Nope.
Careful about the men she associates with? Don't make me laugh.
The differences are much more important than the similarities.
[–]unassumingusername73 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's not quite what AWALT means. Sally is clearly the better choice for an LTR. But, if you think you can just propose to her, then get fat and lazy and have a shitty job, she's going to be unhaaappy and she'll cheat or divorce rape you.
This is the standard beta strategy, and AWALT means it doesn't work on any woman. A unicorn would be the woman who gets tingles from choreplay and your unconditional devotion. Unicorns do not exist.
Even if you start with the ideal woman, she needs you to lead, maintain high smv, and provide tingles, or she will make you miserable. This is the meaning of AWALT.
[–]Philhelm2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think that you truly understand AWALT. In another thread I compared it to the difference between potential and kinetic energy, and will use the same analogy here.
A jar on the shelf might never fall (kinetic energy), but the gravitational pull is always present (potential energy). AWALT does not mean that there are no women of value in the world, nor does it mean that Sally will eventually hop onto the cock carousel, hit the wall, get married to beta bucks, divorce-rape beta bucks, and return to the cock carousel.
What AWALT does mean is that Sally has the potential to do those things since she has the same biological imperatives as Krystal. As great as she seems to be, she is just as capable of becoming like Krystal. The difference is that Sally has (at present, at least) a higher threshold to resist such temptations.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]widec4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]adrixshadow0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]trplurker 1 points1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]WardlyHasted 1 points1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mrp3anut2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]2popthatpill1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NeoreactionSafe1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]1Revo_Luzione1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]NeoreactionSafe2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1oldredder0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]moonmania-2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points | Copy Link
[–]moonmania1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]unassumingusername73 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Philhelm2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link