all 178 comments

[–]17 Endorsed Contributortrudatness 189 points190 points  (16 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You love your wife.

You made her happy.

It's wonderfully weird how that works, isn't it?

[–]Indianbro 107 points108 points  (12 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Blue piller: How can you say you love your wife! You just manipulated her into believing that she deserves those boots to make her feel happy when she clearly was on the edge. How dare you "make her happy".

[–]binglebongledingle 76 points77 points  (6 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Meanwhile bluepiller is being divorce-raped

[–]da-way 32 points33 points  (5 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

and redpiller is getting happy-wife-sex.

[–]Hardparty 24 points25 points  (4 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

and the world keeps spinning

[–]Menadian 24 points25 points  (2 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

and the plates keep spinning

[–]VegasHostTre 8 points9 points  (1 child)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

and the cats in the cradle and silver spoon, little boy blue and the man on the moon. When is beta leaving man i don't when.

But she'll want some Alpha cock then.

Yeah she'll want some Alpha cock then

[–]Menadian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Write me a poem-book and I will buy it.

[–]blazingcopper 6 points7 points  (4 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That was emotional abuse and like you said, manipulation. (Even though every human interaction is literally manipulation in some way) /s

[–]MegaSuperCritic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

/s hasn't fully caught on, yet...

[–]AngraMainyuu 0 points1 point  (1 child)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I think I'm gonna catch some heat for this one, but what you said about manipulation reminded me of another word often misued (in my opinion) its so emotionally charged in just about any context these days, but the word exploit in the dictionary simply means to make productive use of, or to make use for one's own advantage. Manipulation is everywhere, and we're all exploiting each other to some degree, yet its controversy to admit it!

[–]Johnny10toes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well if we admitted it then the blinders would be taken off and the world would live in harmony.

[–]P1r4nha 5 points6 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And he got a chore done that he hated to do himself. It's even better.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Its very ironic that the very principles that everyone is crying "ABUSE!" "MISOGYNY!" about are actually making women happy..

..any woman that is with me WILL BE HAPPY. Its not something that is in her control, its something that I make happen by force. Its the high road of the red pill and only TRP will make that happen.

Edit: shit.. its so fucking easy to make girls happy, I say why not? TRP offers many powers

[–]DanG3 58 points59 points  (5 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

A very hot stripper friend of mine (who I had a thing for) once told me (about giving her tips) while doing a lap dance "Make me work for it."

Most women want to please the man they are into. But it is the PROCESS of attracting and pleasing the Man that is exciting and pleasing to THEM. When a man puts a woman on a pedistal it is annoying and frustrating for her because it deprives her of the opportunity (as "Barbie" put it) to "work for it."

[–]ruboski 5 points6 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Wow, that puts the quote 'I am the prize' in a whole new perspective for me, thankyou.

[–]AngraMainyuu 4 points5 points  (1 child)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Think I just heard something in my brain click, thanks dude.

[–]itsarusko 4 points5 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You should probably get that checked out, you might have had a stroke.

[–]daktardoom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Some food for thought right there, thanks.

[–]mahlzeit 19 points20 points  (5 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There's this story I heard once, sorry that I don't know the details any more, so I can't really google it, but I remember the important part, so here we go:

A company tried to sell some instant dough mix or something like that, back in the 50ies or 60ies. They thought it would be a hit because it saved the women so much time and effort in the kitchen. But the product didn't sell at all, so they made some focus groups to find out why. Turns out, the women felt guilty about using this dough mix because it was too easy to use and felt like cheating.

So they changed the recipe. It now required an egg to be added to it, and - voila - it became a hit. The simple act of adding an egg to the dough mix made the women feel like they contributed to it, and they didn't feel guilty anymore about using the product.

I think that's the same basic idea as in your post. Very interesting stuff.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

    [–]blarggggggggggg 9 points10 points  (1 child)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    This anecdote is mentioned in the BBC documentary 'Century of the Self.' It's really an incredible series about the use of psychological techniques to manipulate the public. I consider it essential viewing.

    [–]jabraunlin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    I may be wrong, but that story might have been from the documentary on Netflix "Inequality for All"

    [–]MrRexels 26 points27 points  (5 children)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    One of the most interesting I've seen here in TRP it's that ''Men love women, women love children, children love hamsters, and hamsters don't love any body'' quote (can't remember from who it was), and honestly, I don't see why we should just stick to that and treat as the quote implies.

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      [deleted]

        [–]BluepillProfessor 0 points1 point  (2 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        This is more than the hierarchy as it also teaches us a truth about the hamsters.

        Hypergamy (and the hamster it spawns) does not care about love, or history, or what you have done in the past. The hamster is cold, hard logic. Far colder than most of us realize.

        [–]1Starswarm 38 points39 points  (58 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Honestly, the nicest part of this story is that you made your wife happy.

        [–]17 Endorsed Contributortrudatness 49 points50 points  (55 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        That's not wrong.

        See that's what TRP is saying.

        Take charge, be the man - they'll love you for it.

        [–]1Starswarm 18 points19 points  (52 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        It has been said that the greatest happiness comes from spreading joy. I think TRP message is about finding and achieving happiness for oneself, and the natural inclination of man is to share that happiness with those they care about.

        [–]Iupvoteforknowledge 14 points15 points  (50 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        So true. It is occasionally mildly frustrating that people are so full of scorn and hate for us. Like some blue pillers and feminists literally want us to die. I feel sorry for those people. I don't know how you live like that.

        [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (49 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Hey, I really hope you find happiness and achieve everything you want from life. I don't think anyone has a problem with that part of TRP's message. The problem people have with TRP are messages like 'treat women like children'. For an example, taken directly from sidebar material,

        " they (women) themselves are childish, and foolish, and shortsighted – in a word, are big children all their lives, something intermediate between the child and the man, "

        Just as children are not equal to adults, men are not equal to women - a "man," who is a man in the true sense of the word, has surpassed the level of women and has grown beyond it.

        The vast majority of women I have met have seemed to be stuck emotionally at about age two. Any frustration of their desires would result in a tantrum. In many cases these were more subtle than throwing herself on the floor and thrashing around, but it was a tantrum nonetheless.

        The more you patronizingly treat women like bratty kid sisters, the more their vaj takes over their critical thinking skills. It all harkens back to the one fundamental principle guiding male-female relations: Chicks love submitting to powerful men. And what is a bigger demonstration of male sexual power than believing that a woman is so far beneath you that she is the equivalent of a child, hardly deserving of a serious answer or an emotional investment?

        Can you not see how that would make some people angry?

        [–]Iupvoteforknowledge 14 points15 points  (36 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Yeah I see how some people would get upset by that. Unfortunately facts are facts. Women mature faster than men but they stay teenagers forever. Sorry its true. Doesn't mean women are stupid, they are just controlled by their emotions more. For that matter, many beta men are too but I still rarely see grown men throw temper tantrums. As a bartender I've witnessed several women revert to extreme child like behavior, especially after a few drinks. Men can be guilty of those behaviors too, especially low testosterone, effeminate men but as a sex women are more prone to use less logic and be controlled by their baser instincts more. We've seen this time and time again in the form of AFBB and hypergamy.

        [–]luxo42 1 point2 points  (35 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Believe what you like, but the sources linked in the sidebar are not scientific studies. There is no evidence that women stop maturing emotionally after a certain age. See for yourself if you'd like.

        This study tested several aspects of emotional intelligence in adults ages 19 to 66. This is after adolescence so men should be pulling out ahead right? Well the researchers found no significant difference between the emotional intelligence of each gender, except in one aspect, emotional management. In emotional management women scored higher.

        And here is a collection of the results of multiple cross cultural studies. It's pretty long so I'll just copy and paste the studies that only tested adults of each gender.

        • Thingujam and Ram (2000)- Women scored significantly higher

        • Nasar and Nasar (2008) - Women scored higher (N=200 College aged) Brackett,

        • Mayer and Warner (2004) - Women scored significantly higher (N=330 College aged)

        • Hunt and Evans (2004) - Men scored higher (N=414 on individuals who having a traumatic experience)

        • However, Kafetsios (2004) - Women scored higher (N=239 between ages of 19 to 66)

        • Pandey and Tripathi (2004) - Women scored significantly higher (N=100)

        • Pant and Prakash (2004) - No substantial gender difference (N=60) There are a lot of details with the Pant/Prakash study so I encourage you page 7 for more info.

        • Tyagi (2004) - No gender difference

        • EI, Brackett, Warner and Bosco (2005) - Women scored higher (N=86 heterosexual couples)

        • VanRooy, Alonso and Viswesvaran (2005) - Women scored higher (N=275)

        • Austin, Evans, Gold water and Potter (2006) - Women scored significantly higher (N=156 first year medical students)

        • Depape, Hakim-Larson, Voelker, page et al. (2006) - found gender was not a significant predictor of emotional intelligence

        • Hunt and Evans (2004) - Men scored higher (N=414 on individuals having traumatic experiences)

        • Saranya and Velayudhan (2008) - No significant difference except for in the case of motivation in which women scored higher (N=60 university students)

        • Carr (2009) - Males scored higher (N-177 medical students)

        • Jadhav and Havalappanavar (2009) - Women scored significantly higher (N=200 police trainees, note women also scored higher on self motivation and emotional stability pg. 10)

        • Tatawadi (2009) - Women scored higher (management school students)

        [–]3rdweal 15 points16 points  (4 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        In the first study you quoted, the method used is the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test which measures the following:

        The Four Branches of Emotional Intelligence

        Perceiving Emotions: The ability to perceive emotions in oneself and others as well as in objects, art, stories, music, and other stimuli

        Facilitating Thought: The ability to generate, use, and feel emotion as necessary to communicate feelings or employ them in other cognitive processes

        Understanding Emotions: The ability to understand emotional information, to understand how emotions combine and progress through relationship transitions, and to appreciate such emotional meanings

        Managing Emotions: The ability to be open to feelings, and to modulate them in oneself and others so as to promote personal understanding and growth

        I would not be surprised if women scored higher in all of the above. You could argue that since women are generally more emotional, they would by definition require higher levels of emotional management in order to function.

        You have equated "emotional maturity" as defined by the sidebar links to "emotional intelligence" when they are clearly talking about different things.

        [–]Riot101 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Well said. It is also the case that people can say one thing in a calm and detached environment and do something completely different in real life. Like you said, women might be able to calmly evaluate their emotions better than men when it doesn't matter, but actually managing them in a relationship is a different story.

        [–]luxo42 2 points3 points  (2 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        If you read the studies linked, the two terms are either used synonymously or there is a large overlap between the two definitions. Here's a couple of excerpts from the actual studies that seem to indicate the two terms are used in conjunction.

        Tatawadi (2009) have studied the differences in emotional maturity among male and female students studying in a management school. The results revealed that the females are emotionally stronger than the males. (pg. 10)

        The results showed that mean scores of students of semester one and semester four show no significant difference in their emotional maturity. (pg. 44)

        ...were more proficient in managing and handling their own emotions as well as of others. (pg. 7)

        I couldn't find a scholarly definition of emotional maturity because it seems that the term emotional intelligence is preferred. In the article linked on the sidebar, he references studies that have tested for IE, so I believe he is using the two terms as synonyms as well.

        If you disagree that the two terms roughly overlap in meaning, how would you define emotional maturity?

        [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Emotional intelligence is usually understood as one's ability to perceive, understand, and manage the emotions of others.

        Emotional maturity should be defined as one's ability to perceive, understand, and manage their own emotions.

        Huge difference. They should not be conflated.

        [–]3rdweal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        It's not an easy metric to define, and it would seem futile to attempt to assign it an empirical value.

        The "emotional intelligence" as defined in the studies though seems to me like moving the goalposts, the attributes measured are meaningless if the context of what TRP stands for.

        For example, look at this article about female and male running performance times. While men obviously run faster in terms of distance over time, it redifines velocity as "heights" over time...

        Well, it is possible to use a different scale. Since being taller seems to give men an unfair advantage, why not compare male and female athletes' performances based on their heights? This means that fixed race distances must be converted into units of competitor height. A competitor's race velocity is then reckoned by dividing the race distance in 'heights' - not in metres - by the total elapsed time for the race.

        Fantastic, but what does this mean in the real world? Ants can lift 50 times their own body weight when an average man can only lift half! I need to move some heavy furniture, guess I'll give my ant buddies a call.

        [–]cerebralfountain 2 points3 points  (4 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        The problem here is that you are conflating two different aspects of the human psyche: emotional intelligence - the ability to conceptualise, understand and experience emotions, and motivation - the propensity of an individual to react given a certain situation.

        The point is, women may be just as, or even more emotionally intelligent than men, however they have a greater propensity to react based on their emotions rather than some abstract idea of logic based on long-term benefit or 'honor', which men are more likely to do.

        Here is a study on differences between the genders in response to stress, in this case alcohol craving, in which women show a greater emotional response: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2575018/

        Search 'tend and befriend' and you will find a hist of studies detailing the fundamental differences in which women respond to stress.

        The problem stems from the use of incorrect terminology in the sidebar. Instead of emotional intelligence, it should say differential motivation.

        [–]luxo42 -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        I'm not arguing that men and women have different responses to stress. I agree with you there. The article in the sidebar states that women do not emotionally mature past adolescence. Nothing in your link said anything about women's responses being emotionally less mature then men's.

        Consistent with hypotheses, women reported and expressed greater sad and anxious emotion than men following stress, even though they experienced equal (for HR, SBP) or lower (for DBP) physiological arousal than men. Furthermore, stress- and alcohol-cue-related alcohol craving was correlated with greater subjective negative emotion for men but not for women.

        So in response to stress women were more likely to feel anxious or sad, but men were more likely to abuse alcohol.

        Tend and Befriend - From the article I read, 'women tend to be more nurturing in response to stress where as men tend to withdraw or get angry'

        Alright, but what does that have to do with anything?

        [–]cerebralfountain 0 points1 point  (2 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        My point is one about motivation. We experience emotions under some sort of environmental stress, and how we respond depends on our motivation, which I am saying is different between men and women. The example I gave is an example of how men and women respond differently under certain stresses i.e. inducers of emotion. So regardless of emotional intelligence, it is our biological motivations which influence how we will act under certain environmental conditions. Women can have more, less or the same emotional intelligence compared to men, but still respond differently because they are biologically programmed to respond differently. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

        The sidebar is not using strictly scientific nomenclature. It is making observations on the behaviour of men and women in society. By 'mature', I assume the sidebar means the ability to make decisions based on their long-term and social consequences as opposed to how it will make one fell in the short-term.

        As another example; it is well known that fewer women go into computer science than men. This is a real empirical observation. Without discussing the reality of gender differences in performance in IQ tests, this observation does not mean that women have a lower aptitude for computer science than men. Hypothetically, they may have a higher aptitude for computer science than men. It may be that because of a combination of biological and environmental factors, they are less motivated to study computer science, and therefore fewer women than men apply to study computer science.

        [–]BluepillProfessor 1 point2 points  (3 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Thanks for your important contribution but this discussion needs to be in another place rather than hijacking this thread.

        The Red Pill does not claim to be based on extensive scientific testing and experimentation. Almost none of it has been done and almost all of that has been terribly biased or otherwise useless in the practical sense. Imagine trying to get Institutional Review Board approval for a study of pickup artistry!! Make it simple- guy approaches girls with a cocky/funny attitude using canned lines vs. acting from a 'let me buy you a drink' canned line. You have so many problems with doing this study it would take me several pages to list them- recording without permission, deception, how to debrief the participants after the encounter, getting informed consent. Good luck with that.

        The Red Pill is based primarily on the field reports of Pickup Artists in the 1990's along with academic writings on psychosocial evolutionary theory. The theory has expanded into a broad theory of male/female interactions in relationships through the work of a number of brilliant bloggers and writers who have contributed many further observations since then.

        There IS work that could be done quite easily. For example, we could surveys households where the man leads (i.e. tradcon typ religious) vs. households where the woman leads (i.e. Beta provider worships at the pedestal) vs. households where they constantly jocky for power and compare things like sexual satisfaction, frequency, etc.

        In short, your personality studies purporting to show women are more emotionally mature than men do not measure what they claim and they have little application to the real world.

        [–]luxo42 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Thanks for your important contribution but this discussion needs to be in another place rather than hijacking this thread.

        Sure, where would you suggest?

        The Red Pill does not claim to be based on extensive scientific testing and experimentation.

        My mistake then. I thought that the TRP theory identifies as rational, scientific, and open to discussion. If that's not true, then I have no reason to be here.

        your personality studies purporting to show women are more emotionally mature than men

        I don't believe this, and I don't think that any study shows this. When age is accounted for, studies showed no significant difference between the sexes. The point of linking those studies was to show that the idea that women stop maturing emotionally after adolescence is an unfounded theory.

        [–]BluepillProfessor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        TRP is rational and open to discussion but is not necessarily "scientific" for the reasons I already stated. Not all truth is based on scientific experiments for many reasons and if you want to wait until the science is "settled" I imagine we will already be on our 3rd or 4th iteration of The Red Pill and employing entirely new tactics that work in that particular culture.

        We do what WORKS. If you have evidence that what we do does or does not work then you are in the right place.

        Just because a poster, even in the sidebar, states something doesn't mean he is correct. The proposition to which you are objecting is, as I recall, that there ARE significant differences between the sexes. While I personally agree claiming women stop maturing at adolescence is a bridge to far, you have to admit that many, many women fit this pattern. Until we stop seeing childish temper tantrums, screaming hissy fits, and irrational and self destructive behavior we will continue to draw this conclusion, your NAWALT notwithstanding. Cheers!

        [–]BluepillProfessor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Thanks for your important contribution but this discussion needs to be in another place rather than hijacking this thread.

        Sure, where would you suggest?

        Start a thread on the topic of scientific support for TRP.

        [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (16 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        In emotional management women scored higher.

        Anyone who has spent any amount of time around women will tell you that they are more prone to emotional outbursts and tantrums than men. How in the world can that be considered good emotional management?

        I have a feeling these studies were all influenced by the need to be politically correct. Can you imagine the bloodcurdling outrage if a group of psychologists reported that adult women have the emotional control of small children?

        [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (15 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Men scored higher in several of the studies I linked.

        [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (14 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        It looks like you're trying to make these studies say something that they aren't saying. No one here is arguing that women don't tend to have a better sense of the emotions of others around them. Studies have shown for instance that through recognizing facial cues women are able to pick up on emotions quite easily.

        But you're trying to conflate that with emotional self-regulation which is something women are notoriously bad at. The studies that you've cited range in their terms and definitions and most of them refer only to Emotional Intelligence (EQ). A few of them however refer to emotional maturity which from context should revolve around the ability of someone to regulate their own emotions and act from a place of logic and rationality.

        Tatawadi (2009) have studied the differences in emotional maturity among male and female students studying in a management school. The results revealed that the females are emotionally stronger than the males. The girls score higher with regard to empathy, social responsibilities and interpersonal relationships than boys. They are more sensitive towards their relationships with parents, friends and siblings. All these traits help them to acquire more emotional intelligence as compared to boys.

        This is an example of how one of the studies you linked defined and measured "emotional maturity" which they sloppily conflated with "emotional strength."

        It's an awful definition in regards to our current discussion because it doesn't look at one's own self-regulation of their emotions at all. These girls could be throwing temper tantrums on a daily basis and would still be considered "emotionally mature" by the researchers.

        It would appear that you're here trying to argue in bad faith. By linking a 76 page document with zero excerpts you've relied on the assumption that no one would bother reading what you linked. But when one looks through the actual studies very few of them have anything to do with the discussion at hand or the argument that you're trying to make (that women can self-regulate their emotions better than children).

        So it looks like you've deliberately tried to mislead people. What do you have to say for yourself?

        [–]2elysius -1 points0 points  (3 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Who said anything about emotional? Emotions are the opposite of maturation, they're signals used by the limbic (irrational) system. Of course women are going to be "better" at emotions, they're more irrational.

        Being more mature, in the real world, is being better able to override emotions with your reason. It's being more rational, not emotional. It's going "I can't afford this, so I won't buy it," then actually following though with it.

        Find me studies saying that women are better at that and we'll talk. I'll wait sitting down.

        [–]luxo42 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        You mean regulation of emotions?

        There were no significant gender differences in the two emotion regulation strategies. We also tested for the possible effects of class level (using ANCOVAS to control for age and gender) on the two emotion regulation strategies and the five branches of trait EI, but we did not observe any significant differences.

        source

        Here's another study on emotion regulation source

        When gender was included as a predictor in our model, we did not observe any significant main effects, not any interactions with gender.

        [–]2elysius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        That's what I thought.

        Adding some more stuff to appease the auto moderator bot.

        [–]Snachmo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        That same inflammatory tone is used to describe spoiled kids without anyone questioning the generalization.

        The TRP sentiment is akin to wealthy children's work ethic. It's not that wealthy children (women) are predisposed to a poor work ethic (emotional immaturity) but that they are so often 'deprived of opportunities' to develop one that the generalization holds.

        [–]Diddlysquatz 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        I definitely can. And while I do believe and practice it to an extent I think that particular segment could be worded in a less inflammatory way. On the other hand I don't give a crap, as the raging blue pill would just find something else about TRP to get pissy about.

        [–]3rdweal 1 point2 points  (9 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        When it's spelled out like that, I can see why it would be infuriating.

        If it didn't work as an attitude though, don't you think it would be much easier to dismiss?

        [–]luxo42 -1 points0 points  (8 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Hey if it works for you then who am I to say otherwise, right?

        [–]3rdweal 6 points7 points  (7 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Let's flip it, if I read on a female oriented forum something like "Men are shallow creatures who can be made to do virtually anything if you show a bit of cleavage and pout", you might forgive me for being filled with righteous indignation at the insult to my gender.

        If you then show me how most men react when a beautiful women walks into the room, I would be grudgingly forced to admit that as insulting as the advice was, there was some truth to it.

        [–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Outrage at "insults of your gender" is the blue pill way.

        A nice TRP response to the cleavage theory would've been "Prove it." Tits or GTFO.

        [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (5 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        An exaggeration of the truth is still a lie though. Why make a theory with 'some truth to it'? Why not just make it all the truth in it's entirety? Nothing added, nothing taken away.

        [–]Riot101 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        For people to understand a truth sometimes it needs to be exaggerated. This is also the same reason stereotypes can be useful: not because they are always true, but because they are true enough that they can be used as a solid starting point.

        [–]3rdweal 1 point2 points  (3 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Anecdotal evidence and personal experiences validate the theory to those who apply it. You can rightly argue that this alone could be used to validate even the most bizarre religious beliefs and is therefore meaningless.

        You quoted several studies below but none of them address the question of whether or not women respond positively to being treated like children. By "respond positively" I would clarify that I understand this as meaning "are happier and with a better sense of well being", not "are willing to do your bidding".

        [–]FrontTooth 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        NononononononoNooo!! What's wrong with you? Didnt u see the EMSK post!?!?! Thats emotional torture! True love stems from communicatioooooon!

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        [deleted]

          [–]1critter_about_towne 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          She obviously has internalised misogyny! Instilled by The Patriarchy. Something something rape culture.

          Am I... am I doing it right?

          [–]GameboyPATH 8 points9 points  (19 children)

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          By taking away the 'equality' aspect of the financial decision and turning it into a dominant one, it gave her an 'out' - a penance of sorts - that gave her permission to get something I would have given her anyway.

          Pardon my noob status, but I think your problem and solution can be interpreted in multiple ways outside a dominant context.

          It sounded to me like she felt guilty for using family money on a purchase that mostly benefited herself, despite your saying it's okay. Her guilt could likely be caused by several factors - past purchase history, her acknowledgement of the agreement you made, or maybe she's on the fence about its worth - I wouldn't know for sure, I'm not her. Your suggestion was a way to alleviate that guilt by helping her feel as though she earned it. I'd probably feel the same way, guilty about making a selfish purchase and wanting a way to compensate.

          In this sense, it was understanding your wife's feelings and helping her resolve them that made this successful.

          [–][deleted]  (16 children)

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          [deleted]

            [–]GameboyPATH 3 points4 points  (13 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            by being patriarchal

            I guess? If you want to interpret it as that? I'm seeing it as understanding how your SO feels and responding in a way that makes them feel better and shows you love them. Anyone, feminists included, would advocate for that.

            I just considered it a good solution that extends beyond TRP.

            [–]2elysius 7 points8 points  (5 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'm seeing it as understanding how your SO feels and responding in a way that makes them feel better and shows you love them.

            You're not wrong. The part you're missing is that the current understanding of male-female dynamics makes it impossible for men and women to properly understand each other.

            At first, OP did what the current narrative has been telling him to do throughout his life: communicate honestly and openly with his spouse. Read ANY mainstream relationship advice column, or even go on /r/relationships, and that's the number one mantra on male-female relationships today: "communication."

            While they were "communicating", equal to equal, nothing was being achieved. It was only when he decided to treat her like a child-- literally, he took the idea from the way some parents were treating their children--, thus playing the role of the dominant parent, that things finally worked out.

            Of course, if he had told her to do something that did not make her feel less guilty about it, it could not have worked out, thus making the "dominant" as pect of the bargain seemingly irrelevant. But think about what the working solution actually implies:

            He told her that if she did those chores, only then she could have what she wanted.

            Is that how equals talk to each other?

            The only way that could work was if she recognized OP as a source of authority over her, someone with the power to allow or not allow her to do something, someone with more power than she has, since her power is not enough. If one of their children had told them that, it would not work. If she herself had decided to do something in exchange, it would not work: she had plenty of time to mull over the subject and had to have arrived at that possibility, but did not act on it. She did not have the authority to perform that exchange. Meaning that without someone with the authority to validate the exchange, the exchange would not feel valid.

            So OP assuming his position of dominance was actually crucial to the deal. This is something that would never even occur to the current generation of beta manginas that feminism is raising. No wonder women are filing for divorce in record numbers, and the ones who don't are taking "female Viagra" so they can manufacture attraction to their equals.

            Anyone, feminists included, would advocate for that.

            I hope now you know enough to realize how wrong this is. They would balk even at the idea that a man ever even thought he could ever even say "if you do this, you can then have that" to a woman, regardless of how much good could come from it.

            [–]GameboyPATH 0 points1 point  (3 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I contend that it's a matter of perspective. In my eyes, the two never stopped communicating. OP's wife was straightforward with her feelings, as was OP with his assertions about the purchase. OP's offer to alleviate her guilt could be seen as an extension of this communication.

            As for the aspect of equality, I honestly thought OP's suggestion was a correction of imbalance that was caused by the purchase. OP's wife didn't want to take advantage of their funds for what could be considered a selfish purchase. It's the same feeling you'd feel of indebtedness if your friend bought you lunch. OP's suggestion of completing the task was her way of eliminating this indebtedness, thus bringing them back to equal levels, where no one feels like they owe the other person anything.

            This can all be done without perceiving one party as the authority over the other. If it helps, the scenario can be perceived through swapped gender roles. Say OP wanted to buy a nice TV, and his wife, despite hardly ever using it, is cool with this purchase. OP is still conflicted, though, about whether his financial decision is worth the money it takes from the family. His wife, hoping to resolve his conflict, suggests he makes his purchase feel earned through hard work, like fully cleaning the garage like he's been meaning to do for a while.

            The only difference in perspective is whether this solution establishes some sort of dominance or authority. If you compare it to talking to a child, you'll perceive it as such. I see it as an emotional understanding and resolution between two equals.

            [–]2elysius 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            No one would agree with your concept of "communication" here. Not us and certainly not the feminists, which would categorize this as some form of manipulation or even "abuse". Communication is talking and discussing mutually, not one side employing subterfuge to achieve what it wants.

            Regarding your example, on the third paragraph, the wife is in a clear position of authority and power over the man. You're simply being naive if you "choose" to see it any other way.

            [–]GameboyPATH 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Not us and certainly not the feminists

            Again, I'm not sure how you believe this. The feminist friends I know would be glad to see partners working together to resolving a problem. Although I don't think this will go much further without involving the No True Scotsman fallacy, so I'll drop it.

            Despite OP's intention of making this "subterfuge", I still insist that his attempt at being dominant is really a simple suggestion to resolve his partner's conflict. You consider me naive to not consider your point as the only possible explanation, but I consider it closed-minded to perceive it only as such.

            Regarding your example, on the third paragraph, the wife is in a clear position of authority and power over the man.

            I... what? How? Since when is offering advice a "clear" sign of authority? People who offer advice aren't always in charge. I'm sure you can argue that her offering advice implies weakness on the husband's part, but I can just as easily argue that the situation can be interpreted to mean that the husband is the one in power. Because that's what this dominant perspective comes down to in this example: interpretation. The idea that this can only be perceived in the context of a dominant/submissive relationship is ridiculous. This is why I say that anyone would advocate for OP's resolution of his wife's conflict, that it's not just a red pill strategy.

            [–]2elysius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            The feminist friends I know would be glad to see partners working together to resolving a problem.

            Tell them this story, exactly as it was told here, then tell me if they thought the way OP handled this qualified as "working together".

            About your example, I misread. I thought you were using the exact same situation and had only swapped the genders, not that you made the tactic into an explicit suggestion, verbally explaining the motives and all.

            So that's another thing entirely, and it's not an appropriate parallel, so I stand by my viewpoint.

            And sure, it's all interpretation. Some interpretations just happen to be more useful and predictive than others.

            [–]brandor77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Yes, this is what I was trying to convey. The "you are an adult and my equal, you make the decision yourself" response generated strife, where "work for it, you can have it" generated bliss.

            [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Feminists don't want women to be happy. They want them to be in control.

            There is a very big difference.

            [–]GameboyPATH 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            If you say so. Regardless, the idea of romantic partners seeing each other's emotions and acknowledging and responding to them in a constructive way is something that's just generally accepted as good advice.

            [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think if you take an honest look that you'll find the feminist framework does not lend itself to a healthy understanding and acceptance of either one's own emotions or the emotions of others.

            Patriarchy theory in and of itself is a tool to propagate anxiety and resentment among women towards men.

            [–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 7 points8 points  (3 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            No, firstly, a feminist would immediately demand a citation.

            Secondly, he (or more forgivably, she) would demand that the woman is her own locus of control and must be allowed to make the decision about buying the boots, not be bullied into doing housework that the evil man admits to hating himself! Yet he made HER do it! Just so you know, by the year 2020, you'll go to the special domestic emotional abuser prison for shit like that.

            PS: Doesn't matter to the feminist that the woman is happy as a bluejay in the end, strutting in sexy new boots to boot. Because feminism as a social force doesn't care about making women truly happy. For that, you'd need to cultivate TRP virtues.

            [–]GameboyPATH 1 point2 points  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            None of the feminists I know would advocate for any of this. Hell, they hate people like this. It sounds like a caricature of political correctness that's borderline strawman. Where do you hear this?

            [–]lloopy 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think you are trying to do some mental gymnastics to justify the feminist viewpoint instead of seeing the simple truth of the red pill. We call this hamstering.

            [–]GameboyPATH 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Hamstering? I'll have to Google that.

            I don't think it's mental gymnastics. It just sounds to me like a matter of perspective.

            [–]P1r4nha 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I honestly don't think this story has much to do with the male/female relationship. She felt like she didn't deserve to make such an expense with money that didn't entirely belong to her. It doesn't change if he gave her "permission" to do it, she still didn't deserve it in her eyes.

            So all he had to do is giving her a way to deserve the expense and that's by doing something that benefits both of them (a nicely decorated house) and something that she probably knew he hated to do himself. That way she can do two good things, one for him and one for both of them and thus can then get the boots to do something good for herself.

            That way she did not disturb the balance of who owes what to whom.

            Regardless of how silly you might think this way of thinking is, I find it quite logical. Also I believe this really can do without applying gender roles. Could as well be two friends who go on holiday together on a shared budget or something. All you need is somebody who's sensitive about the balance who owes what to whom.

            [–]GameboyPATH 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Also I believe this really can do without applying gender roles. Could as well be two friends who go on holiday together on a shared budget or something. All you need is somebody who's sensitive about the balance who owes what to whom.

            Thanks, that kind of explains it better than I did. It just sounds like it's simply supported by basic social understanding of emotions than dominant gender role theory.

            [–]1critter_about_towne 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            It actually doesn't sound like you are interpreting the situation different at all. The key point is that it was he who created the context wherein she could feel like she earned it - she wasn't doing this on her own. So you are, for the most part, correct... she needed to alleviate her guilt and feel like she earned it. He understood his wife's feelings and made that situation happen. That's... exactly what it's all about. He understood. He took action. It was his leadership, his understanding and willingness to take the action that resulted in the emotional good. That's the essence of it all right there.

            [–]GameboyPATH 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think we can agree on how he positively handled the situation in a way that benefited his wife's conflict. Indeed, it's important for people in relationships to understand the legitimacy of each others' feelings.

            [–]BrothaTom 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            "Problem Solved"

            and slowly takes out a cigarette...

            [–]PlanB_pedofile 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            An old school man I knew had a dog. Whenever the dog looked bored, he would randomly bark commands at her like fetch, or sit, and the dog will do the commands and be happy.

            His advice "dog's need something to do to feel worthwhile. Giving them a command makes them feel acknowledged and that you are paying attention and when they perform the command they get their reward and feel accomplished. Don't let the dog get lazy or it will feel detached and depressed"

            Oddly, this same advice goes for women. Girl bored at home? Give her a challenge, then when she succeeds, give her a reward. Humans function on a work/reward like system. This is how people get sucked into video games and mmos.

            [–]100Timeswww 11 points12 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            You're a great husband dude

            [–]IamAwaken 6 points7 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This is a nice soft step in the right direction. You see the happiness on both sides for yourself.

            [–]PragmaticD 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'm so happy that there have been a handful of quality marriage posts here recently. There's a strong "don't get married" message here (rightfully so), but that doesn't do anything for the countless men in marriages that could be greatly improved by taking the red pill.

            Great post - keep them coming!

            [–]projectself 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This falls under the 3T's.

            tease, touch, tell.

            tease her, playfully.
            touch her physically and often. tell her what to do.

            [–]AchillesOtherLeg 5 points6 points  (3 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            am i the only person struggling to see this in a redpill light?

            She wanted to spend money on boots... k, i'm betting she has a collection already but whatever. Then she herself stopped herself from getting them. Then you ask her to do something trivial (iknowrite a woman doing something!) and she gets the boots.

            Looks more like being rewarded for basic contribution and encouragement of vapid retail therapy. You're even looking forward to reward sex from your now happy wife. If that isnt BP I don't know what is.

            I'm no expert but surely a red pill response would have been some kind of call out on her droopy mood after denying herself the boots. A&A like "nothing will ever be the same without those boots, not sure how we can go on" or just eliminate her mood by doing something else that's interesting. Then at sexy time later you're not working on the basis of 'reward'.

            EDIT looking through this thread im seeing a distinctly blue posting and some blue voting patterns. I'm even seeing obvious concern trolling zipping under the radar.

            [–]DanG3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Re: "blue posting ... "

            Pure Red doesn't (entirely) work in LTR's and marriages. Women are attracted to the Red ("the flame") for "tingles" but need the Blue as a salve (to sooth their burnt wings). In fact, in a Pure Red LTR woman will test for the blue if she is burning out because of too much Red. If she finds too little or no blue, she will seek out a beta (for a while).

            The PUA/Player/"Asshole" can afford to, and actually benefits from, showing the women the door. (It raises his value as "The Prize.") The married or LTR guy has to play a modified Game which OCCASIONALLY emphasizes his blue value. (I always make a point of pointing out all the Cougars and Post Wall women to my wife:"; "She looks soooo desperate. I feel so sorry for her.")

            [–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            OP's doing great if you ask me, but you got a big point about the retail therapy and "looking forward to reward-sex". OK, he made the wife happy, now time to read more sidebar and make the husband happy too, perhaps with some deeper soulsearching leading to more outcome independence, leading to the closest thing to sex abundance marriage that you can engineer.

            [–]Scarlett_Begonias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Actually I think this "strategy" is so general that it doesn't belong to either Red Pill or Blue Pill. Or, more specifically, it could be either or neither. If my boyfriend wanted something but couldn't justify spending the money, or if I myself did, I could see either of us suggesting something like this. I use this strategy on myself - if I want to relax and read a book for a while but there's housework to do, I simply decide which tasks I have to finish in order to get my "reward" of reading or taking a shower or eating some cookies or whatever.

            [–]samep04 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            i actually like everything about this story: you and your wife have come to a mutual decision on how your money is spent. you and she both respect that decision. you both have found a way to respect your decision of money spending while allowing for a reward system and are both happy with it.

            the main aspect i like about this, is that you (as the leader of the household) have made a responsible decision, and you both have respected that decision. neither of you ended up skirting the rules.

            [–]BluepillProfessor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This is an exceptional field report that shows WHY men are supposed to lead in the relationship. Women vacillate back and forth. They change their minds (over and over again). I know, NAWALT but almost always. They agonize about the tiniest minutia and make everybody around them miserable. Take away the decision from her, make the decision that is objectively in her best interests and it makes her life (and yours) so much easier.

            This is not about intelligence or education or any of that. This is about the masculine way of deciding things vs. the feminine way. Women poll their friends, try to construct complicated charts in their dino brains comparing the options, and consult their feelz when making a decision. Men think about it for a second and make a quick judgment call. Sometimes it is right, sometimes wrong. If it's wrong then we deal with it by making another decision- all while the woman is still talking on FB with her friends about her 'options.'

            [–]AlkaloidSwag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            that's some Dale Carnegie shit right there.

            [–]mightyspan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Just wait until you finish that side bar and get into some serious implementation.

            [–]EducatedCavemen 2 points3 points  (4 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            has to be a mutual decision

            That got under my skin. You have to take the relationship by the horns. The details or reasons for the purchase don't matter, the decisions have to be done by you if not then this translates to indecisiveness which to a girl means weakness.

            If you can't make a decision by yourself imagine what is going to happen when shit hits the fan. Do you really think your wife is going to have the ability to make a mutual decision with you under duress?

            You're probably doing this to make her feel part of the family and that her decisions/opinions matter so she doesn't feel left out but i'm pretty sure she would prefer having a man that she knows she can count on when shit gets real rather than being part of petty decisions like this one. It's either a No or a Yes and the answer is based on her actions.

            She sounds like a good girl, she actually hesitated.

            Good job though. You sound new so, Welcome to TRP!

            [–]beaudee 11 points12 points  (3 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Ruling your relationship with an iron fist may work for you, but you seem to think that it's the only way

            Not all of us have, or even want, completely submissive significant others.

            [–]EducatedCavemen -3 points-2 points  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Let me put it this way. If it's my money and the purchase is something as small as a pair of boots then the decision is up to me. If I buy the item it will be because I would like to reward good behavior. If she has money and buys it then that is her problem.

            Also when the woman gives you her perspective of things it can help you improve your decision making but at the end of the day the decisions are up to the man to make(especially if he is the sole provider).

            completely submissive significant others.

            You make it seem like I want my woman to have her mouth shut at all times. What I am saying is that the decisions are up to me to make. She can give me some input and I will consider it but it is still my decision.

            [–]samep04 8 points9 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            legit question: have you ever run a business or been general manager of a business? i'd like to hear about how you delegate decisions when your entire day becomes making those decisions and not planning for your success.

            [–]beaudee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            There is a spectrum to this philosophy. The OP seems to be subscribed to a blended and nuanced purplepill (which I've heard touted in this community for LTRs and marriages), whereas you seem to subscribe to dogmatic, blood-redpill philosophy.

            While I appreciate your perspective, your advice seems out of place in this thread. The OP shared an anecdote with the community; he wasn't looking for a complete overhaul of his marriage.

            [–]NicolausFapernicus 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Not sure if this is an unpopular opinion here, but.

            Why not give it to her as an allowance OR take her on a "surprise" shopping trip that way it seems like it was either her decision to buy it with cash she earned for a job she did. Or that you did something magnanimous for her instead of "allowing" her to buy it.

            [–]samep04 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            because sometimes women just want to feel sexy. sometimes they want to feel like they thought up (and purchased) a way to make themselves feel sexy for their man.

            you can sit here all day and control every dollar and every single decision, but i mean COME ON, women know how to be sexy. just keep them wanting you

            [–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Took all the ooomph and most of the "happy" right out of the gesture with that. Good job dude.

            Women often need a man's permission to do the stuff they already want to do themselves. This is their nature. Let us continue to face that crushing burden of our responsibility, as men, to permit women only what we want to become permissible, going forward.

            [–]srguapo90210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Just curious, how much were the boots?

            [–]OutThisLife 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Yep I do this kind of stuff as well. It just seems to work better.

            [–]SillyAmerican 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            A leader always respects the input from their subordinates. Anyone here telling you that by valuing her opinion on decisions that have an impact on your family is way too gung hoe to me. As an Alpha, you need to keep the needs and feelings of your flock in mind otherwise youre just not doing your job. Excellent decision. I was thinking you were just gonna go buy them for her, but making her "earn" it or whatever was an awesome idea.

            [–]chakravanti93 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            It really does boil down to math and self-worth. If you don't do the math, someone else will, if its worth anything at all.

            [–]SickSadWorId 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Yay now you have an obedient dog that you call your wife! congrats! Ask her how your scraps taste, she'll like that because it sounds like you care about what she thinks.

            [–]lurkeryouredumb -3 points-2 points  (40 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            If nothing else this reinforces the fact that women really are basically children.

            [–]ThrowThingsPlease 0 points1 point  (38 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            How are women basically children?

            Edit: I just want to understand their perspective. There is no animosity--I'm only asking a question.

            [–]lurkeryouredumb 5 points6 points  (32 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Man, I hope you're joking.

            Have you not read the sidebar or the required reading?

            http://no-maam.blogspot.fr/2012/06/woman-most-responsible-teenager-in.html

            [–]ThrowThingsPlease 2 points3 points  (31 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Just wandering by from a link somewhere; I haven't been through the sidebar entirely, but I'm going through it.

            That article used quite a few supporting sources from psych documents circa 18xx. I'd be circumspect in relying on their credibility. Alongside that, the article didn't really seem to have too much substance beside unsubstantiated musing.

            Do you have any recent studies?

            [–]1critter_about_towne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'd caution that recent studies are as filled with bias as older studies. The biases are different, but they are there, and sometimes harder to tease out. You are right to be cautious of the older science (but don't just dismiss it, many of those biases were based on observations too), just remember that more recent psychology is rotten with political and other biases.

            [–]_SEEING_RED 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'm going to go ahead and state that there are a lot of generalizations in this post. I think they are accurate in the average case.

            Read Arthur Schopenhauer's short essay "On Women". Basically he says that women are for propagating life.

            TRP has helped me to understand what this means. Women bear and raise children, and they are built for these tasks physically and mentally (for example, better understanding of nonverbals to communicate with young children). Men provide and build (better understanding of logical thought to plan and execute complex projects).

            I have found that women need clear rules and boundaries set for them. Maybe everyone does, but women don't handle power well. My significant other respects me more and seems happier when I can lead her. Unfortunately I'm having to threaten to leave her because of my past failures in this area. I will continue to improve, and try the strategies espoused here in a somewhat scientific manner, and I encourage you to do the same.

            There's a lot of hate in TRP (see my username :) as people "wake up" and realize there are a lot of lies out there, especially regarding female sexuality. Look at the Kinsey report with the understanding that women are hypergamous (seek the best available mate) and it becomes clear that they will let loose and do tons of freaky shit, but only with an alpha.

            Another great TRP lesson is from an excellent post here on powertalk (hidden communication). Also read Venkatesh Rao's series where he defines powertalk and other communication in the context of The Office, it's awesome even if you hate TRP. Anyway the gist of the post was that "No means no" should be interpreted as "If you're the type of guy who can't tell the difference between a rejection and a token no, then you're not attractive enough to lead me into your bed and I want you to ask for consent. Oh and by the way if you have to ask then the answer's no."

            Some heady shit. No wonder people get angry at us. But, when it comes to women, who would you rather ask for fishing advice: a fish or a fisherman?

            [–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang -1 points0 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            How are women basically children?

            By way of being women, as that's what women are. It's easily observable, unless you're wearing the "equality" rose tints. Reality is the most irrefutable and apolitical circular argument: women act like children, men act like men, and feminist manginas demand peer reviewed citations...

            [–]ThrowThingsPlease 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            feminist manginas demand peer reviewed citations...

            My apologies for asking for substantial evidence.

            women act like children, men act like men

            But again, have you never worked with logical, emotionally grounded women, or illogical emotional men? By making these reductions you turn off the women who are level headed.

            I mean, your entire comment is childish.

            [–]blazingcopper -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Think of it as they're like the oldest teenager in the room

            [–]ThrowThingsPlease 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I've read that post and outlined why I think it's invalid in another comment below.

            Do you feel all women are emotionally inferior to men? What are your reasons?

            [–]JeremySadusky -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            That's so petty, all of it, her guilt for wanting fucking boots, your "generous" gestures, and most of all that "marriage improving" aspect of it in face of a fact that you are in legally and socially equal union yet here you are systematically going out of your way for petty partner's convenience.

            [–]uncletom40 -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            And rather than having her milling about for the next week feeling queasy about the purchase, judging by her mood, there are good things in store for me tonight.

            She should submit to sex whenever you want it. If you have to make her happy for her to "let" you fuck her you're doing something wrong.

            [–]1critter_about_towne 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Sniff sniff What's the smell? I know it from somewhere.

            Ahhh, yes, of course. Troll.

            [–]uncletom40 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            why would I be a troll?

            fuck you feminist leftist cunts are retarded, anyone who doesn't follow your groupthink is a troll

            [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            What boots were they? I'm a fashion expert and hope she bought something with a welted sole and full grain leather upper. Have you considered investing in a pair of high quality boots yourself? Great investment, gents. Nothing says alpha MALE like a pair of made in the USA leather boots. oooh yeah.

            [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Fuck yeah boots are alpha as fuck homie

            [–]drrtyfrrnr 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Nothing says fashion expert like talking about the features of a boot rather than how they look.

            [–]samep04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            i'm (80%) sure this was written in jest, but is actually true.

            [–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Probably had something to do with how you phrased the initial response to her question. Instead of saying "you would look nice in the boots and I'd like that" you basically told her what it is she would be doing if she did it. I mean it seems like you were being kinda a butthole and a psychological angle was being played by you. When you think you are mentally superior to everyone it can mess up a relationship.