all 166 comments

[–]Casanova-Quinn 188 points189 points  (27 children)

"Where have all the good men gone?"

Translation: I can't get a high value man to commit to me. All the men in my dating field are losers (read: average).

[–]SquareScrewdriver 107 points108 points  (18 children)

The only real response you can make is the one that will make you seem butt hurt. : "You're not hot enough to get a good man." drops mic

[–]jiveraffe 149 points150 points  (17 children)

Better question: "Why do you deserve one? What are you bringing to the table?"

Cue hamster.

[–]Wings_of_pain 63 points64 points  (11 children)

What's weird is that to them 'all women deserve someone' aka high status male, yet not all males deserve 'someone' aka a woman of decent to above average looks. It's exactly because of this kinda mindset that MGTOW appeals to me.

[–]squarehead93 56 points57 points  (7 children)

Hell, not all males even deserve anyone in their minds. That's why the "you're not entitled to sex" meme is so prevalent among feminists. It is of course almost exclusively said to low-value betas. In other words, it's a way of saying "shut up while we get railed by alphas and accept that most women don't want to fuck you, creep!"

The thing is, they're right. As a man, you're not owed anything. You have to work for it.

[–]jcrpta 19 points20 points  (2 children)

That's why the "you're not entitled to sex" meme is so prevalent among feminists. It is of course almost exclusively said to low-value betas.

The frustrating thing for the average beta is he's basically spent his whole life being told that women go weak at the knees for "nice guy", that a woman "doesn't care what the man she loves looks like"; he buys into it completely.

Some time in his twenties or thirties, he finally registers that what he's seeing in real life doesn't quite marry up with the worldview he's bought into. A natural reaction to that is to ask "Why not?" - after all, he's done everything society said he should. By all accounts, he should be surrounded with gorgeous women. Yet he could be dunked headfirst into a barrel full of titties and still come out sucking his thumb.

[–]pronobis21 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Nothing like finding TRP while still in highschool, let me tell you...

[–]jcrpta 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Believe me, if I had a time machine...

[–]Wings_of_pain 13 points14 points  (1 child)

The thing is, they're right. As a man, you're not owed anything. You have to work for it.

I won't disagree there. However, the kind of manipulation that goes along with all this turns me off tbh. I mean yeah even men who are doing well, if they don't get married they are viewed as if something is wrong with them as time goes on. I think I heard it referred to being like Peter pan or some other shit where women who are getting old want to manipulate men into getting married. Personally, I will never get married and have seen first hand with my dad and my brother how women try to use marriage and children for manipulation. I'm all for a casual relationship, but marriage? Yeah not for me.

[–]My87thAccount 20 points21 points  (0 children)

They call it Peter Pan syndrome. Apparently we're supposed to want to commit our lives to women who have spent their best years chasing any man that makes their pussies tingle.

[–]PeteMullersKeyboard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, I make the argument that no human deserves anything - you must work for whatever you want, no matter what your genetic makeup is. This idea that some people "deserve" things because of one factor or another unrelated to their own merits is dangerous and becoming widespread.

[–]mtersen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh but they feel like they sure are entitled to sex! if you're a good looking 10,and shes a 6 and wants you to fuck her, but you don't wanna sleep with her,she's going to fuck your day up with rumors, false harassment/rape claims, stalking, ect.

[–]deaduponaviral 18 points19 points  (2 children)

Born alone, die alone...if you find somebody along the path that operates at the same level and brings happiness to both, you just won the lottery. Too few people understand this.

[–]ex_astris_sci 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Absolutely. Someone with a similar existential understanding of life.

[–]AnarchyBurger101 0 points1 point  (4 children)

[–]sway_usa 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I hear this song in my head every time a woman drives.

[–]frozen_strawberry 0 points1 point  (2 children)

that describes my driving perfectly.

[–]sway_usa 0 points1 point  (1 child)

[–]frozen_strawberry 0 points1 point  (0 children)

haha no, i'm very lucky i havent been put on the internet yet.

[–]sodave22 31 points32 points  (3 children)

See it in action here

edit: Now using the english language appropriately...

[–]Ronin11A 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Holy shit, she publicly FriendZones that guy. Hilarious.

[–]PedroIsWatching 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Jesus Christ, this has to be 'shopped. No punchline is delivered that perfectly.

[–]brotherjustincrowe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LOL. "We don't see each other like that at all." I mean, he sees me like that, but ew, gross. I'm not letting some beta be my boyfriend while I whine about not being an alpha's girl.

[–]rymdsylt 21 points22 points  (0 children)

they don't even have to be average. they're simply not the top 20%(which, again, makes them sub-average to women)

[–]drallcom3 19 points20 points  (1 child)

My go-to answer: "It might sound crazy, but maybe they're with the good women."

Then I watch their hamsters generate enough power to turn the night into day.

[–]brotherjustincrowe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's true, the "good men" have all either P&D'd her and moved on or committed to a better woman than her.

[–]AntixD 18 points19 points  (0 children)

or "I fucked a bunch of assholes and now no "good guy" wants to be my betabux"

[–]SwissPablo 70 points71 points  (13 children)

The gulf between a woman's and man's definition of "good man" is where the trouble lies. For a woman it's a physically-attractive, high-status man that is desired by other women (social proof). A man's definition is based on what women say they want a "good man" to be: honest, caring, committed. The top 20% of men know to ignore what a woman says she wants.

[–]Wings_of_pain 34 points35 points  (10 children)

Exactly. Like take for example, admittedly I've never been good with women. Not so much cowardly (see beta behavior) but I just don't click or get along generally speaking. And while I am decently in shape, all I want in a woman is decent to average looks and someone who isn't crazy af. Women on the other hand want a man with high status, lots of money, good looks, muscular, other women who are attracted to him etc. The irony too, is that this is a general opinion in my experience as even the fatties want these things. It's just a mess.

[–]Anonymous_Bosch 19 points20 points  (7 children)

Get the fuck out of America.

Most red pill stuff doesn't apply where I live, in Asia.

[–]ultranationalist2 10 points11 points  (0 children)

of course, you're the top 20% in asia so you won't feel the sting.

[–]Cmon_Just_The_Tip 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Which country do you live in and can you provide a few anecdotes?

[–]Anonymous_Bosch 14 points15 points  (1 child)

Living in Bangkok.

I'm above average looks wise but that doesn't seem to matter all that much to Thai girls. I've got some game but not a classical alpha by any stretch of the imagination. I had sex with probably a hundred girls before I came to Thailand so I know how to get laid.

At home a girl is likely to not go for a second date if she thinks the first date wasn't perfect. I went on a date with a model here last year and tried to kiss her in the cinema on our second date (first date was lunch and that's all). She pulled away. Where I'm from that means you're not going on a third date and after the movie I said 'so do you still want to go on a third date?' and she looked at me as if I was nuts. 'Yes, why do you ask?'. She was simply keeping her honour and wasn't a whore and she was intelligent enough to know men adore her and will try their luck. Anyway I ended up getting my dick wet with her but I felt I could do better.

Girl I'm with now is I would say in the top 5% of girls lookswise. Killer body and really feminine and deferential to male authority. Plus she is really happy. Feminism made my last two girlfriends miserable I think because they were seeking validation constantly.

Anyway, my new girl is 25 and I'm mid thirties. Is this the kind of stuff you wanted to know? Sorry if it isn't, wasn't sure what to write.

[–]Cmon_Just_The_Tip 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yeah cool. I'm dating a hot taiwanese girl and recognize many of the same things.

It took me 5 dates to sleep with her but it's been well worth it. I can now appreciate and respect how she looks after herself, physically and mentally, to avoid becoming a used up whore.

In fact, she is so sweet and caring, so far removed by the attitude of western women, it's literally a breathe of fresh air

[–]sway_usa 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Hey! Welcome here from RVF. You are quite the quality poster over there, looking forward to your contributions here.

[–]Anonymous_Bosch 0 points1 point  (1 child)

We aren't the same person. Mere coincidence.

I saw this name mentioned on RoK somewhere and couldn't believe it. But I've been a redditor for years.

[–]sway_usa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My mistake. Any way, you seem to post quality things too.

[–]Imapancakenom 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I just don't click or get along generally speaking

I thought the same of myself for a long time, and the best advice I can give is to act like you think a redpill man would act. It works wonders. Fake it till you make it if need be. Just act like you know what you want and you know what you're doing (for example, never saying something like "I dunno, what do you want to do?") and you'll get along very well with women.

[–]commenta22 3 points4 points  (0 children)

honest, caring, committed.

In context they're still good traits, but they're not traits that will get you laid / dates. I can't think of any circumstances where the topic (or a chance to demonstrate) honesty or being 'committed' would be approached without it being through forced behaviour which comes across as socially retarded and desperate. They're character traits which come into play once the attraction has been realised. The colossal amount of bullshit starts with what works to establish that attraction - which is basically the nail you've hit on the head (be attractive, have status).

[–]the90stotallysucked 1 point2 points  (0 children)

good man" to be: honest, caring, committed

Well, no, they do actually want this, but from a 20%er

[–]grewapair 118 points119 points  (50 children)

So basically, the bottom line is this. The sexual revolution (i.e. birth control and the reduced slut shaming that followed) has allowed the top 20% of men to fuck virtually anything they want, and what they are willing to fuck is about the top 50% of women. Women with birth control and abortion as a last ditch effort can now allow themselves to be used by these guys, where in the past they couldn't really afford to take that kind of long shot chance.

Those top 50% get fucked by a guy like that and then they believe that they are worthy of a boyfriend in the top 20%, thereby distorting their view of where they stand. They think they will land a top 20% boyfriend, when instead, what is really happening is they are merely getting used by the top 20%.

Their view having been distorted, they then start riding what we think is the CC (but to them is a desperate and unsatisfying attempt at trying to get a guy well beyond their station) to try to land one of these guys for at least long enough to post a few pics to facebook about him so the other girls will think they are in the top 20%, as opposed to just getting used. It's not like they all want to ride the CC, they do it because those 20% they want, trick them into riding it.

They hold onto this view of themselves as being a top 20% woman but lamenting they can't find a good guy (i.e. one who doesn't treat them like shit because he's really just using them) until they start to realize that they are really just getting used by the guys they really want. At that point, they lower their standards to have a real relationship, secretly holding out the hope that although they are dating a BB, they could still land a top 20% guy for a real relationship, in spite of the fact that they really can't.

They never let go of this dream, because for a few nights, they got to live it, so it's tough to believe it wasn't real.

And therein lies the problem we have with women. What's the solution? Work on yourself to get into the top 20% so the woman will respect you? Probably not realistic for those in the bottom 60% - it's a long way to go and might not ever be possible. Give up and let the girl settle for you, while longing for a top 20 percenter to which she feels entitled? Not a happy life. Force all women to wear Burkas and demand they stop riding the unsatisfying CC until their father arranges a marriage?

I wish I had the answer.

[–]fastball21 26 points27 points  (5 children)

Two things:

1) women have essentially created an "orbiter" class for themselves, their top 50% circling the top 20% men with the hopes of locking one down eventually. Even if all those men were ultimately married, 30% of women are going to be left out from getting what they want.

2) men below the top 20% are starting to wise up, right now it's men in the 60-80% range. Another decade and the lower tiered men will understand. An underwater earthquake has occurred, and men are becoming the invisible wave streaking across an open ocean. 20 years from now that wave will reach shallow waters (critical mass) and hit the beach like a tsunami. The recovery period after that wave hits will take a century, if ever, and it won't be pretty. Civilizations fall with this kind of upheaval.

[–]watersign 14 points15 points  (4 children)

Civilization is on the brink of collapse as it is my friend. If I had the power, I'd be born in the late 60s or early 70s, live out my best years during the boom periods (80s and 90s) and get into an accident right before the housing crash of 08 so i wouldn't have to live in this "brave new world" ..shits about to get VERY real.

[–]colovick 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Or just be smart about it and pay off your debts so that the value of your home and car mean nothing to you. I can live just as happily in a 100k house as I can a 500k house, and the difference in lifestyle is night and day.

[–]watersign 2 points3 points  (0 children)

i have no debts whatsoever and live like someone below the poverty line. i also make well above the national average

[–]Fryguy48 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I am agreeing with you. Anyone with a brain can see that shits about to go down, our false system has been on its last legs for awhile now.

[–]watersign 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yep...there is a reason why the police in this country are turning into a military force and those FEMA camps are being staffed up. Hitler would be proud of what the US is going to do to its people.

[–]drallcom3 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Most of the 80% will never make it in the 20%. It takes a lot of discipline and laziness is human's natural instinct (save energy for bad times). Even if you are disciplined you might not make it. Maybe you're born dumb, ugly, in the wrong circumstances or raised badly. Or the other men are better at reaching the 20%, because the 20% is not a flexible number. If you only present the 20% to the women, they will still choose only 20% out of the original 20%. Many men unknowingly realize that and just settle with a fatty or do the BB dance, because it's comfortable and their only chance.

Sad, but true.

[–]RiPing 8 points9 points  (12 children)

The answer is to either go MGTOW or indeed raise your SMV to top 20% (or at least die trying and enjoying the journey of self-improvements) . If you are so ugly that money and lifting is not enough you can still do plastic surgery or wear male make-up and work hard in improving your social skills. But if you are that ugly I would just go MGTOW. The world is unfair, but you shouldn't hate women for how they biologically are, you should accept it and stop whining and make yourself happy. You aren't powerful enough to force all women into burqa's and that would ruin the easy sex for the powerful 20%ers. Just surrender to the truth and focus on yourself, not on changing society, as the little change you could potentially do to society is not worth all the trouble.

[–]TexAs_sWag 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The best thing about being a man is that there is no one type of handsome. I advise any guy who believes he is just plain ugly to hit the gym before swearing off women. Take a look at the before/after photos on /r/fitness. Chubby men with horrific faces turn into athletes with chiseled jaw lines. You see, the features that define attractiveness in a man are typically tied to his physical fitness -- i.e., things he can improve.

And for the guy who truly is strange looking, start with getting in shape... Simultaneously work on your ambition and personality. Achieving excellence in those 3 categories with an otherwise strange looking face is exactly how you create a brand new definition of hot.

[–]cagethepepper 4 points5 points  (9 children)

Even then, say you reach the 20%, what if she kicks in her hypergamy and goes for the guy in the 15%? There's celebrity men out there getting divorced with their women jumping ship. Reaching the "alpha level" doesn't guarantee happiness, doesn't guarantee shit. This is why MGTOW is the only logical solution.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)


    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    If Chad feels empty inside it's because he looks to women for validation and to 'complete' him, rather than completing himself.

    [–]brotherjustincrowe 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Don't you dare speak so of St. Thundercock.

    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The Real St. Thundercock™ would never look to women for validation.

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

    We are in nothing like a free market of marriage/mating. A bedrock foundation of a free market is the voluntary nature of and enforcement of contracts. No-fault divorce has completely abrogated this.

    [–]RiPing 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    If you reach the 20% then you might want to choose a religious or Asian women. Yes all women are biologically hypergamous, but culture and social construct can counter it. But it's still a risk you have to take. MGTOW is the easy way out, but both options are viable and fun.

    [–]cagethepepper 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Asian women are very hypergamous. Religious women - nah, I'm alright. MGTOW isn't the easy way out, it's the logical escape route. I think the foreign wife fallacy is simply that, a fallacy.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Foreign wife only works if you stay in the foreign country. If you bring eastern/foreign women to the US or other feminist infested places they'll adapt to what is expected of them and divorce your ass and take half your shit because everyone else is doing it.

    [–]esco_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    If you're that ugly, honestly, just focus on career and use prostitutes

    [–]2015redditor 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    ^ yup. Well done summation.

    I wish I had the answer.

    Yes it's interesting to contemplate but it's an illusion to think that you or I can change the course of things. You can tilt at windmills if you like.

    [–]j-pHil 15 points16 points  (8 children)

    The answer is life isn't fair. Play with the cards you're dealt, and do the best you can.

    [–]1wiseclockcounter 10 points11 points  (7 children)

    just backing you up here. I think i'm fortunate enough to have a pretty solid frame and facial structure to build upon. But i'd be bummed to have no hope at all like many others must.

    I've said it before, i'll say it again. Some of you reading here will only gain enlightenment from this sub. When it comes to actually executing the techniques, maxing out your SMV, and getting ahead in life-- the privilege is reserved for those capable. You could be a socially retarded, malformed idiot... and any amount of reading won't do any good. Shit's fucked up and j-pHil's right, you deal with what you're dealt. If I was so inclined, I'd feel sorry for these people, but it wouldn't make any fucking difference.

    [–]Fryguy48 7 points8 points  (6 children)

    That cut deep; but i needed to hear it. Thanks man.

    [–]1wiseclockcounter 3 points4 points  (5 children)

    Be sure not to let your insecurities get the best of you, though.

    There are 4 breeds of people: those who are accepted and know it, those who aren't accepted but don't know they could be, those who aren't accepted and don't know it, and those who aren't accepted and know it. (you can probably twist a few more types out of that framework)

    But unless you possess the intelligence to know you are of the last breed, you might as well shoot for the second one. You may not reach sexual acceptance, but you can at least reach social acceptance or acceptance in your career.

    Anyways, it boils down to the fact that so many people are flat out delusional. The funny thing about me saying that is that those who are delusional don't even fucking know it. So if you're able to consider your delusion, I promise you, you are in relatively good standing. Your consideration will allow you to best deal with that hand your dealt... however shitty it may be. And if you've read this comment and didn't consider in the slightest that you might be delusional... then i'm sorry to say you're probably delusional.

    [–]Fryguy48 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    I guess i was delusional.... i always understood that life sucks and it is what it is... at least i thought i did; but after reading this thread, it really smacked me in the face....

    [–]bustanutmeow 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Have you done everything possible to improve what you can?

    [–]Fryguy48 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Im working on it, currently im a medic, about to go back to school so i can advance in my medical career. Im running and lifting weights (lost over 20 pounds, i wieght 150lb now). Im in decent shape; but i got a ways to go still.

    [–]bustanutmeow 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Good man. keep it up, Keep improving. If you aren't moving forward, You are going backward.

    [–]jcrpta 7 points8 points  (4 children)

    Their view having been distorted, they then start riding what we think is the CC (but to them is a desperate and unsatisfying attempt at trying to get a guy well beyond their station) to try to land one of these guys for at least long enough to post a few pics to facebook about him so the other girls will think they are in the top 20%, as opposed to just getting used. It's not like they all want to ride the CC, they do it because those 20% they want, trick them into riding it.

    This, I think, is the most insightful paragraph there.

    See, the problem I have with the cock carousel concept is it isn't very good when it comes to child rearing. It's great when it comes to getting impregnated by Chad Thundercock, but that's about as far as it goes. In an ideal world, Chad would hang around to raise the kid.

    And if you subscribe to the nugget of RP theory that suggests sexual behaviour is driven primarily by genetics - millions of years of evolution - and that while society plays a role in shaping how it happens, it doesn't turn a lady into a whore or vice versa - then arguably the carousel doesn't quite fit, simply because Chad is never in a million years going to hang around to raise the kid.

    But what if the cock carousel wasn't really a carousel at all? What if it was, as /u/grewapair says, an illusion caused by many women constantly trying to nail down men in the top 20%?

    You'd have exactly the same thing we see in the world today - a handful of men who seem to be playing life on easy mode, at least when it comes to sex, while everyone else is trying to hide their desperation while hunting for the leftovers. But the reason for it would be totally different - it's not hedonism, it's desperation. Only instead of desperation for pretty much any sort of sexual attention (which is what we see in the AFC), it's desperation for the "right" sort of sexual attention.

    [–]Adun4184 8 points9 points  (2 children)

    Chad Thundercock doesn't need to raise the kid, that's the cuckold's job.

    [–]Dokkobro 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Say what you want, but I'm glad my dad stuck around.

    [–]brotherjustincrowe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I am too, honestly. But that's an anomaly statistically speaking. Women will always see unattached alphas as more attractive than their own husbands (betas by default). See GLO's post about fucking our wives.

    [–]joshgeek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This I think is true. Chad Thundercock can't help who he is and can't help that every piece of hot ass is trying to tie him down in the worst way. Who can blame him for resisting when his options are so vast? Women complain, "oh he's just a player who won't settle down," and all the same the hats pile up in the Ring of Thundercock. I'm sure he'd love to settle down, but it's just not in the cards for poor Chad. (I say poor in all earnestness.) All the options in the world and every single LTR would make him miserable. So ironic it's almost funny. Almost.

    [–]ELI20s 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    The answer is perhaps you work to be the best you, and you get the girl that the best you deserves.

    I subscribe to this.

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)


      [–]esco_ 0 points1 point  (3 children)

      i think the 20% rule is grossly out of whack.

      Looking around, i'm clearly in the top 20% of men. It's not enough to get laid all the time by hot girls. Objectively, from a decent girls perspective i think i'm in a strange zone where im good enough for a relationship, but not good enough for casual sex.

      I think the true number would be closer to 10%, or 5%

      [–]brotherjustincrowe 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      It's recursive. Of the 80% who get with the top 20%, the ones who know that they can go for the top 20% of the top 20% (4%).

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)


        [–]brotherjustincrowe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        The one where she keeps going up? Yeah, I know that one. It's a good joke.

        [–]Abreseyes 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        So what's your take on the study quoted - That seemed to suggest it was top 20% of males banging the most promiscuous 20% of women.Was that denial on the women's part when filling in the survey?

        [–]Science_isthenewcool 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        Yes women lie when it comes to sex surveys, men a little but not so much:

        "Men’s answers didn’t change as much as did women’s under different testing conditions."

        There was a study published in the Journal of Sex Research, where a sample of 201 college students, men and women were asked the standard questions about how many partners have you had, etc etc. Then they were attached to a "Lie detector test"(which was fake) and the women all raised their number of partners significantly. It's a peer reviewed published study.

        Here is an article on it.

        An exerpt:

        "women who thought their answers might be read reported an average of 2.6 sexual partners. But those who thought they were monitored by a lie detector reported an average of 4.4 sexual partners. Women who were not attached to the lie detector, but who had privacy during testing, gave answers in the middle – an average of 3.4 sexual partners.

        Men’s answers didn’t vary as widely. Men who thought they were attached to a polygraph reported an average of 4.0 sexual partners, compared to 3.7 partners for those who thought their answers might be seen."

        [–]isthatyourdaughter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I wish I had the answer

        Isn't the answer obvious? The answer is to let enough of them fuck up and learn their lesson, so they can warn the next generation not to make the same mistakes they did. Men, for their part, need to be warned to recognize these women so they can avoid committing to them. For the men without such faculties of observation, the answer is grasseating. Progress is built from misery, that's a historical truth.

        You can't save these women. The only hope is that they serve as a cautionary tale for the women of the future.

        [–]joshgeek 0 points1 point  (4 children)

        Funny. Somewhere in your 4th paragraph I started thinking "ok but what can be done about any of this?" And then you echoed the sentiment. At least we recognize a paradox when we see one I guess. It just seems like no one is happy except the exceptional males, and somehow I doubt even that is the case. Shit is crazy.

        [–][deleted]  (3 children)


          [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          Live for you, not for the hopes of having a fairy tale relationship. People come into your life all the time, then they leave. Some are never seen again, some stick around, but things always change accept it.

          Enjoy your life, definitely fuck hot bitches, but don't make them the priority. Let them come and go like waves on a beach, they can build a beach in your life or they can erode everything you once were, you choose which one they will do.

          [–]1whatsazipper 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          There's no glamour in plate spinning. It's simply a rational behavior given our options.

          As far as LTRs go, you'll get less shit from women who recognize they are lower SMV than you are, but relationships in general will impose some taxing behavior on you nonetheless.

          Unfortunately, dealing with modern women requires us to tend more toward the detached side of emotional behavior.

          [–]joshgeek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Thanks for sharing man. Yeah I can imagine it's kind of exhausting no matter what you do and maybe that's just another "that's life" issue. Everyone is doing the best they can with the cards they're dealt and maybe no one is ever really happy. Maybe we're fooling ourselves that happiness is the objective, or even an achievable one. Maybe the best we can do is to have our needs met by whatever means is at our disposal without going crazy. If that's the case, we're not doing all that bad. Cheers, bro.

          [–]fabrab 74 points75 points  (3 children)

          I've seen this when talking to a girl I was dating.

          She was complaining that back in high school nobody ever thought she was hot, and she thought it was because of her braces and that she was in honors classes and shit like that. She said there were just NO guys into her. I couldn't believe this cuz I'm sure there had to be at least a few, she looks a lot better now but she was still cute then.

          After talking for a while the truth came out - it wasn't that there were no guys into her, it's that there were no top 10% guys into her. She said lots of her nerdy male friends were into her but they hardly even registered to her as potential boyfriends or fucks, because they just weren't attractive enough.

          No good men indeed.

          [–]Newdist2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          After talking for a while the truth came out - it wasn't that there were no guys into her, it's that there were no top 10% guys into her. She said lots of her nerdy male friends were into her but they hardly even registered to her as potential boyfriends or fucks, because they just weren't attractive enough.

          Even the top 10% would have banged her NSA, just not dated her.

          [–]the90stotallysucked 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          her nerdy male friends were into her but they hardly even registered to her as potential boyfriends or fucks

          Seems like they didn't even register as human, considering her "NO guys into [me]" comment.

          [–]Red-Zen 42 points43 points  (0 children)

          stifled by a new form of male entitlement, this one fueled by demographics.

          errmmm... I'm pretty sure that's female entitlement, not male. Women's desire for the top 20% of men is stifled by the reality that they're outnumbered 5 to 1. Their entitlement is stifling them from getting with the other 80% of men.

          [–]Frisky-Fox 47 points48 points  (0 children)

          It is all about the theoretical investment into child rearing. If you are looking to just bang. The female investment is much much higher for the female, so a female can and will select a man several points higher than her to procreate, and she will look mainly to qualities that will help that child survive without a father (strong immune system, tall, muscular). But if a woman is looking for a mate to help raise the child, AKA a good father or husband, that man will be investing a similar amount of energy into the offspring. Thus men women marry are equal level to the women, sometimes even less depending on the ability to invest in the child (hence why chicks dig rich guys.

          Feminism is really clever in that it attempts to raise the average value of man that a woman can attain through either sexual strategy.

          Feminists are just female pickup artists.

          [–]Ulfberht14 6 points7 points  (0 children)

          The institution of marriage came to provide women with a way to make sure that both her and her children were taken care of by the father of their child.

          Now big daddy government takes care of single mothers. Food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

          [–]some12talk2 31 points32 points  (1 child)

          Susan Walsh is not a management consultant, she is a Blue Pill pusher

          edit: recent blog postings by Walsh include:

          "Marriage Causes Greater Happiness and Life Satisfaction" (January 9)

          "We Are All Settling" (January 7)

          "12 Key Practices in a Successful Marriage" (January 5)

          "What Women Want" (December 23) - which is "Women want a whole bunch of stuff in varying degrees" (that's an actual quote)

          "What To Do If You Had Sex Too Soon And It’s Got You Feeling Insecure" (December 11)

          and really, you guys (if you are guys) are downvoting me for pointing this shit out?

          and here's Walsh on the red pill:

          "It is my earnest hope that the recent events in Isla Vista will expose not just the misogyny but also the fruitlessness of Red Pill ideology as a means of relating to women"

          "Busting the Red Pill Myth ... To hear manosphere cave dwellers ..."

          but wait, there's more from this cunt:

          "Red Pill 'truths' necessitate generalizing to the entire female gender."

          "At the heart of the malignancy that is the Red Pill is the conviction that there is only one true definition of masculinity: a large number of sexual partners."

          "Over time the conversation here became increasingly hostile and ultimately I was forced to ban nearly 200 Red Pill males to rid my own blog of misogyny."

          do you really want to start quoting Susan Walsh here, who banned "200 Red Pill males" from her blog?

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          Susan Walsh is a great case study for not allowing females in male spaces. Her blog started as a red pill woman blog and slowly transformed over many years into the garbage it is now. She managed to get a lot of the manosphere to suck up to her in the process. It was sickening to see.

          [–]ThorLives 13 points14 points  (1 child)

          Last year, a former management consultant named Susan Walsh tried to dig a little deeper. She applied what economists call the Pareto principle—the idea that for many events, roughly 20 percent of the causes create 80 percent of the effects—to the college dating market, and concluded that only 20 percent of the men (those considered to have the highest status) are having 80 percent of the sex, with only 20 percent of the women (those with the greatest sexual willingness); the remaining 80 percent, male and female, sit out the hookup dance altogether.

          I correct this article everytime it comes up, so I'll do it again:

          Susan Walsh (of the "Hooking up Smart") blog did not say that the Pareto principle is true. First, she also didn't come up with the idea (she references another blog that makes the 80/20 claim). Here's an article from the Hooking up smart blog (note that this HookingUpSmart article was posted a year before the Atlantic article, so it seems to be the one they're referencing):

          Sex and The Pareto Principle Susan Walsh • September 14, 2010

          Do 20% of the men get 80% of the women? I’ve come across this claim repeatedly, though the application of the 80/20 rule varies. Sometimes it’s stated that 20% of the men get 80% of the sex, which is actually a very different claim.

          Translation: Susan Walsh did not come up with the idea that the 80/20 rule is right. It's clear that she heard it from someone else, and decided (in this article) to try and figure out if it was true.

          Only 16% of men in their 20s have gone without sex in the last year, and that number stays steady in the 30s. This belies the notion that a large majority of males has zero access to sex. Conversely, only 19% of women in their 20s have had more than one partner in the last year, and two thirds had one partner. This belies the notion that the majority of women are “riding the cock carousel” while in their prime.

          Translation: The idea that 80% of guys are frozen-out of the sex is wrong. The idea that women are sleeping around a bunch with alphas is also wrong. While it's possible that women with only one sexual partner in the last year were sleeping with one "alpha", it's difficult to say that while simultaneously claiming that only 16% of men in their 20s have gone without sex in the last year.


          I. The numbers do not support the claim that most women have casual sex with impunity through their 20s, then seek a sexually inexperienced male to settle down with. Rather, the data supports the idea that the numbers of promiscuous men and women are similar, though there are more promiscuous men than women. Most likely, this population is sexually active with one another. For the vast majority of Americans who do not have a high number of partners either lifetime, or within the last year, the numbers are also similar, though again, men are more promiscuous.

          Translation: She says that the "cock carousel" isn't true. Also, even though there are promiscuous men with higher numbers of sexual partners, it's basically the same situation in the female population - i.e. small numbers of promiscuous women and large numbers of not promiscuous women.

          II. The data does not refute or confirm the concept of female hypergamy, which is the desire of the female to pair with a male of equal or higher status than herself. Within the ranks of promiscuous males and females we may still conclude based on anecdotal observation that some women are more willing to have sex with the attractive men they would otherwise not have access to as a way of increasing their social status. However, that number is a minority, though perhaps higher than the 6.8% for all women aged 20-29 who had 3+ partners in the last year.

          III. A relatively small number of promiscuous men is having sex with a relatively small number of promiscuous women.

          She doesn't actually say anywhere in the article that the 80/20 rule is correct.


          [–]Rathadin 6 points7 points  (7 children)

          A man should always try his best to improve himself, whether that's building muscle, climbing the corporate / blue collar ladder, starting a business, whatever.

          But at some point, mathematics comes into play... even if every man in America learned to play an instrument, played a sport in high school / college, worked hard to become wealthier, you'd still have a top 20% and a bottom 80%.

          That's how math works. No matter how high you set the bar, and no matter how many men eventually jump over it, all you've really done is shifted the bell curve.

          The solution is that women are going to have to wake up and realize that as a 6, they're not going to marry a 9. Not gonna happen.

          The core problem though, is how do you create this awakening?

          [–]mirepoix 6 points7 points  (2 children)

          Thinking realistically about this breakdown is the Achilles heel of this sub. If you look the thing straight in the eye you will find that many men are simply not going to a make it.

          "Lift and earn breh, that's all it takes."

          The reality is that self improvement is only useful as a means of entering the top 20% for someone who is already pretty close. Many men are just too far down due to genetics or circumstances.

          For them, the real advice should be "get into prostitutes and don't allow a woman bb you."

          [–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire 5 points6 points  (1 child)


          I've pointed this out several times before. Some men are just too far behind genetically to ever be top 20%.

          It's like people don't understand that sex is a competition between men. Some men aren't able to compete and need to tweak some things to be able to compete. Some men aren't able to compete and never will be. I've been lifting for 2 years, I work hard to pay for my own tuition and rent my own apartment, I've come a long way mentally and spiritually, and after 2 years I'm JUST NOW starting to be able to get laid, and I'm still not on the same level as my natural alpha friends yet.

          My friends that are just naturally tall and good looking have pathetic skinny/skinny fat bodies compared to mine, none of them has the same education level, none of them are as confident or have the same social skills as me, and none are even half as outgoing as I am.

          They don't have to be.

          Their genetic gifts allow them to get more and hotter girls with a fraction of the effort.

          Imagine if every man in America followed the red pill's advice and we were all muscular, with 8% bodyfat, and we all made more than 70k a year gross income.

          What THEN would separate us?

          GENETICS. Height, facial aesthetics, race/skin color, and other physical features that cannot be improved in the gym.

          There's always going to be losers and winners.

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

          You're leaving out the most important: Frame and Game.

          [–]Fryguy48 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          I have come to the conclusion, that this awakening, will probably not happen in my life time.

          [–]AdmiralVonJackass 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Social media has changed that game. Women get to see the top men of the world now, rather than the top men in their community. It is scewing their standards.

          Women won't change. Will you stop being attracted to the hottest pussy because it makes average women feel left out? Of course not. Attraction is not negotiable.

          What a man can do is take action in his own life by living to his own standards. I've found western women to be impossible to deal with while living a quality life, so I don't participate in the market place. I am in the 61-79% range of men.

          Women will not wake up if their perception of what reality is matches what they are being allowed to get away with and still secure commitment. With an influx of successful foreign betas, and effeminate nerds raised by single mothers, I would not hold my breath on waiting for women to change their ways.

          What you can do is either get in the top 80%, date abroad, or find purpose away from the sexual market place. Notice that all these solutions rely on action that you have to take, because if you wait around for someone else to change all of women for you, you will live in disappointment. These are the times we have been born into, and it is our burden to be dealt with. Generations before us have trudged through global warfare and plagues, we should be able to get through this.

          [–]drallcom3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Take away divorce rights and social security. That's how it worked 100 years ago when everyone was married before 25.

          [–]sway_usa 6 points7 points  (2 children)

          The beauty of the comment section in the piece is lots of guys who are 29, 30, 31+ who are dating early - mid 20s. Also, guys who won't date women with kids or their own age. Red Pill is spreading, and in all the right ways.

          [–]Fallout99 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          I think you're right. I'm not in the top 20% and neither are any of my friends. We are all just normal guys, made the right life choices, have hobbies, work out, good social life, ect. But even with my friends who haven't been introduced to the red pill they know that something is wrong. They can't put their finger on it but they know that they are getting a bad deal having to go to extreme lengths for these below average women (fat, single mothers, horrible personalities) despite being far above them in every metric. Only good things can happen from more and more people actually reading this information.

          [–]WeCantHaveFun 22 points23 points  (12 children)

          lol, and everyone here is looking for that one, special, ugly fatty?

          Let's be honest. Both sides want the cream, but most will only get chaff.

          [–]Migidarra 29 points30 points  (9 children)

          Both sides want the cream, but women(5 and below) generally can get some dick while men(5 and below) aren't getting any. Granted its the guys fault because that's how the world works and if he isn't working he isn't getting.

          [–]commenta22 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          Spare a thought for the female 1-2s who see the common 'women can get laid easily' but seldom get any. If 5/10 men took the plunge they could probably pick off the 1-2s with ease. Christ that'd be shit.

          [–]drallcom3 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          They'd rather masturbate than picking off a 1/10.

          [–]WeCantHaveFun 14 points15 points  (6 children)

          For a place where feminist rhetoric is supposedly wholeheartedly rejected, this lie has been swallowed whole.

          Women don't fuck because they like it; otherwise, we'd all be fucking like rabbits in the streets until we starved.

          They fuck as prepayment to get commitment. When they're discarded, they, like everyone else, pretend like that's what they wanted all along.

          [–]reddishman 3 points4 points  (1 child)

          How do you explain plates with existing bf ?

          Girls are horny just like men however their hypergamy reduces their desire to fuck until unless there is a top tier guy available.

          [–]WeCantHaveFun 5 points6 points  (0 children)


          They view you as higher value and are praying that you'll commit. Their existing boyfriend is insurance, a glorified beta orbiter.

          Girls are horny just like men however their hypergamy reduces their desire to fuck until unless there is a top tier guy available.

          The liberal dicksucks call that a "non sequitur".

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)


            [–]WeCantHaveFun 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            a woman masturbates

            Another myth.

            Besides, preference is not desire. Because they prefer alphas doesn't mean they want to fuck all day.

            A man would fuck 10 times a day if the supply were available. A woman does not despite abundant supply.

            [–]commenta22 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Or they fuck because they think that it will somehow raise their social value amongst other women.

            [–]LessThanPerfectCell 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            Of course man, no one is debating that. But the argument here isn't that men want to starting noticing and hooking up out of shape slagathores. The argument is that because of SJWs, mainstream femisnism, and just overall societal conditioning in the West a lot of women think they deserve the Top 20% of men. Period. Anything below that is just someone that they will string along in their phone book with occasional texting and smiley emoticons until they realize that the Top 20% of men will only commit to someone in their own league.

            They don't look at a 5 or 6 and think "Damn, he is soooo hot. I just want to jump his bones". They look at a 5 and 6 and think "He's a nice fellow. But I don't really think I would hook up with him though" Im sure one of my friends (the out of shape one, of course) would think he is a nice guy"

            While on the other hand most men would see a 5 or 6 and think "She may not be all that, but I'll see where things lead if we talk".

            Therein lies the problem. A lot of women (READ: a loooooooot of them) think that just because they were used that one time by a Top 20% man in a dry spell that their value is now 1 or 2 points higher than it should be. While a man may hook up with a Top 20% female, but he will not inflate his standards. Or at least most won't

            [–]WeCantHaveFun 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            While on the other hand most men would see a 5 or 6 and think "She may not be all that, but I'll see where things lead if we talk".

            If they're honest, they don't. If they're honest, they think "I'll fuck this until I get something hot" just like how women keep betas or weak boyfriends around while they seek/fuck alphas.

            While a man may hook up with a Top 20% female, but he will not inflate his standards.

            Absolutely we do. No one wants to go back to a Civic after owning a Ferrari. Men, like post walls, downgrade out of necessity.

            There's no difference between the entitlement of men and women. All think they deserve the best for doing nothing, worst in the US where "self-esteem" is off the charts.

            We're all evil. No side is just or good.

            [–]MattyAnon 9 points10 points  (4 children)

            Most striking to me was the innocence of these young women. Of these attractive and vivacious females, only two had ever had a “real” boyfriend

            Most of these women have not had a proper boyfriend, but presumably plenty of hookups. That's innocent now!?!?

            [–]sealteamaus 11 points12 points  (0 children)

            the hamster is a beautiful thing

            [–]commenta22 3 points4 points  (2 children)

            You've also got to note, when she says 'attractive' they'll be 7s at best. That's the only reason she's mentioning them in the article: if they were 8/9+ with decent careers they'd have had a relationship.

            The 6s/7 girls are the real target audience of her article. The girls who in their heart of hearts know they aren't top tier but can't come to terms with it. This leads to a desperate attempt to gain validation through riding the CC. Funnily enough these are also the girls who will brutally shut down any guy who hits on them who isn't better looking than them out of the pain of being reminded of their real level.

            [–]Imapancakenom 4 points5 points  (1 child)

            if they were 8/9+ with decent careers they'd have had a relationship

            What does them having careers have to do with it?

            [–]commenta22 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            I've generalised a bit and just realised the career bit doesn't really apply to the quote above - cheers for pointing that out. I was thinking more about when she starts discussing her very successful friends who are attractive but are single / with much lower status men (which could be taken as being down to settling).

            Poor point all round from me.

            [–]Fallout99 7 points8 points  (4 children)

            Can you name what subreddit it was in?

            [–]asscapper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            TIL, i'm not sure if its ok to link so isent it to you.

            [–]TexAs_sWag 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            Hope this isn't against the rules, but I believe I saw it in TIL yesterday. Grab a snippet of text, and run a Google search with it in quotes and "reddit."

            [–]dennislang 3 points4 points  (2 children)

            To see reddit accept ideas quite so contrary to the groupthink is staggering.

            Could it be that Reddit is slowly embracing RP theory?

            [–]scummcdirt 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            I think its because they have seen the hypocrisy of the other communities.

            This is an open community, where anyone can show up, state their opinion, and spark an intelligent debate.

            SRS, and the other communities like it, are not. They are invite only. they are echo chambers for the mentally deranged, incompetent, and socially toxic.

            [–]andthebeatgoesdun 6 points7 points  (1 child)

            Great analysis. It's amazing how much scientific proof one can find in Red Pill analytics. When I see these kind of posts and comments outside of TRP, I feel that it is only a matter of time before more and more men (and dare I say it...even more and more women) realize the biology and psychology behind our desires.

            [–]smokingmonkey420 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            It is the next step in our evolution. Self-awareness.

            [–]Science_isthenewcool 5 points6 points  (3 children)

            I honestly thought that the poster in TIL had ripped this off from one of us. It reads like text book TRP.

            [–]JihadDerp 3 points4 points  (2 children)

            Yeah I didn't think it was subtle at all. I was fully expecting the comments underneath to be variations of "looks like trp is leaking again" But yay for small victories.

            [–]Squeezymypenisy 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            If you quote articles and random facts reddit won't notice what your actually coming from.

            [–]sway_usa 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Just avoid the terminology, that's usually the tip-off.

            [–]FourLokoKills 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Women no longer need an 80% man because the government takes care of them (by taxing the 80%).

            [–]dousche 1 point2 points  (3 children)

            I don't think it's about high value as much as it is about bad-ass men disappearing with the pussification of society.

            "Good men" aka the top 20% doesn't need to be some kind of Dan Bilzerian-type character, but more of a macho guy who stands up to himself without apologizing or explaining his every action. Remember your blue pill days, when you saw complete losers "who were douchebags" still get the girls? These men are not rich, nor successfull, but rather they have traits considered attractive to the opposite sex, manliness. In this regard I am glad I live in a western society, as compared to macho cultures as Russia where I would probably have less of an easy time picking up chicks.

            In this society 80% are orbiters of some kind, of fucking course they will be invisible to sluts.

            The different sexes, we have different things we find attractive with one another, and you can go about whining all you want about how women are held to a higher standard regarding looks, both face and body, but let's not forget that men are held to a manliness "alpha" standard. Yeah, I don't believe being alpha is binary, but rather a spectrum where the men of today's society have allowed themselves to be pushed further towards the beta side of this spectrum. This is most noteworthy here on the other subs of reddit, where "being a Nice Guy™" is the main meaning of life at the cost of your own pursuit of success.

            In your mind, be the 20%. You will notice how other guys become invisible to most of the girls and they will only have eyes on you. From there, keep frame motherfuckers!

            [–]scummcdirt 3 points4 points  (2 children)

            Yeah, i have noticed that once an orbiter leaves his social click for a bit, either because of work or school, they always seem to discover a girlfriend.

            Then magically they become interesting to the stupid cunts that ignored them for months or years.

            I see this phenomenon all the time. it would be sad if it wasn't so funny. These girls complain about there not being any good guys around, in front of their single good guy friends, who they already are in a positive, friendly, non sexual RELATIONSHIP in.

            [–]dousche 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            Here's the thing though. I don't really blame the girls because I think that it's the men's fault for being pussies. Sure, society as a whole makes things worse, but it all begins with the pussification of men. Hear me out here, same way women stopped caring for themselves, that's on them. But we all have to put in effort, wether that be stop being pussies or stop being fat feminists who lock like a sack of potatoes with purple hair. I think it's wrong blaming bitches for this.

            As the late Patrice oneil once said, a woman is the direct result of how you threat her. If you let yourself be her time hoe, you don't deserve her pussy.

            [–]scummcdirt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Yeah, its like the chicken/egg argument.

            I am enjoying how the social dynamic has changed. The feminists, in their poorly thought out actions, have created a world which favors, and rewards patriarchs(what i call alpha males)

            It was only a matter of time before something like redpill happened. Its like sharing proper hunting/fishing/car repair techniques. only its about picking up women and being successful.

            Tl/dr/straight to the point:

            The pussificaton of men has resulted in a society where the rewards for being "alpha" are far greater then they ever have been. As such, more men have incentive to become "alphas".

            [–]omigahguy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            "soft harem" puts a definition to what has been going on in my life....pretty kool shit!

            [–]Yakatonker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            Patriarchy serves Matriarchy, women got smarter when ancient civilizations starting popping up. The infrastructure to plan better aided in facilitating women's complete enslavement of the male population through marriage. This essentially meant every women was provided with a resource generator, a father figure for their children and economic stability rather then the present situation today with the unleashment of female hypergamy and mass debt yields. Feminism is the inherent female mating strategy of human women, the destruction of the old system freed women from the Matriarchy model and moved them into the egalitarian model. However old applied new women until their biological imperatives(baby rabies/nester) will try with all their might to land a wealthy alpha. Around 30 with their imperatives going into overdrive they'll become desperate, their expectations lowered and they'll start hunting beta bucks. However there in lies the problem, beta bucks of generation X+ isn't as retarded or socially conditioned, nor have the hypergamy women even thrown him any attention or even used their time and effort to mold the beta into a good little social slave for feminist society, women depend on feminism which fails miserably as men peak over their mid 20s when life experience starts to show them how truly awful the modern hypergamy female is.

            Men for their part thanks to the globalist internet are being hit hard with counter social programming, Red Pill being the shot gun showing the naked psychology of women's hypergamy, followed by MGTOWs who can't tolerate modern female behaviour and sworn off it, and the MRAs who're the old gen. of boomers trying to do damage control, when it is clear before us all is women are no longer socially molded into what the beta man considers marriageable material. This is why "co-habitation unions" or displaced dating are the new norms in industrialized society. The other funny thing with feminism is that its displacing womens long term strategic interests of old, men were the provider slaves, meaning women were given stability, increased perceptions of scarcity and a higher pedestral from which to stand upon. Now women's Mating Social Value has crashed, and in a monumental way because they're no longer giving betas attention or value until their mid 30s where a big thing has happened in that time frame, they've fallen out of the all men's biological mate selection period. Its here where the beta is no longer so easily manipulated by the testosterone in his blood, and his hyperhamy partner is out of her peak meaning the beta will instead of emotional perceiving her, will judge the female based on her utility. Honestly speaking with the experience I pertain with the women of our times, they have almost nothing of value to offer us as personable people around age thirty, with the exception to the old hooks, children, "emotional support", "companionship", and "added income"(women see male income as "our income"). Men aren't stupid at thirty, they know the modern feminist has ridden the cock coursel and they've been plentifully abused and economically siphoned by the predatory female, the value of a woman for the beta is still above 0, but it's not far from it as a base as men near thirty.

            Basic conclusion drawn is feminism has effectively annihilated women's collective MSV in the long term of things, with Generation X+ betas given no attention or direct female social reprogramming most by the time of thirty will be far less accepting of the feminist wreckage suffering baby rabies.

            [–]Bruiko 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            So, this is like a present-day example of natural selection. Makes perfect sense that women only want to fuck the best.

            [–]thoudini 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            I think maybe the question we ought to be asking ourselves here is.. What steps do I take to increase my chances of being a top 20% male? Women can increase their rating with dressing well as can men, but women have makeup as a crutch. What many men fail to realise is that personality and charisma can actually increase their rating by more than they think too. Was wondering what are people's views on the path to becoming the top 20% male, aside from natural/genetic looks.

            [–]Squeezymypenisy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Have a good career. Be independent, basically be a man. don't be boring. Thsts the problem with some guys. Get out there and get Hobbies. enjoy your life regardless of women. They should always come second.

            [–]heavywepsguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Can you PM me the link, or at least show the screenshot? Thanks.

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

            Well, there it is: the red pill out in the open, in the mainstream The Atlantic. Another case of Open Hypergamy as Rollo calls it.

            [–]Baylien2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            As a pretty attractive man I'm willing to admit that i have plenty of average to below average chicks i could bag but i choose not to because i have higher standards. That being said I'm not gonna sit here and whine about "where have all the good women gone". That's because I'm accountable tor myself and my standards. Just another illustration of the difference between men and women when it comes to being honest and real.

            [–]Moldy_Gecko 0 points1 point  (8 children)

            Line that caught me was patriarchal marriage. We all know marriage is a feminist ideal.

            [–]Waldo00 2 points3 points  (7 children)

            I think the tradition of marriage was for both parties. There was a mutual exchange, assurance of paternity for assurance of resources. The institution has just been butchered.

            [–]Moldy_Gecko 0 points1 point  (6 children)

            You are right, but some saying this about the last 50 years is way off base imo. I am not saying It's still not mutually beneficial, but it definitely and always has helped women significantly more.

            [–]Waldo00 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            I don't know. I think no matter what if you want a child you need a women. That puts her in the truly powerful position, so you have to make sacrifices if you want a baby and that sacrifice used to be to ensure the survival of the her and the child for the rest of your life. Women don't need that anymore from men the whole institution isno longer valid. We're just caught up in a transition phase where men are holding on to a vestige of the past.

            [–]Moldy_Gecko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            That's in agreement with what I said.

            [–]drallcom3 0 points1 point  (3 children)

            100 years ago being a housewife wasn't easy. There was at least 8-12h of work to do. In modern times you maybe have 2-3h of very light work. Emptying the washing machine instead of hours of scrubbing cloths.

            [–]Moldy_Gecko 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            And you also didn't get alimony, have to work a real job, or any of that other bs that goes on nowadays. And marriages lasted longer. The men were hard working alphas, and if they were rich, their wife didn't have to do shit but look pretty and remember peoples names.

            [–]drallcom3 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            Most of them weren't alphas. They were betas who got rewareded for their contribution to society with an everlasting marriage. For the women it was the social security that is now done by the state.

            [–]Moldy_Gecko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Except most were. And your last line is right. The government already destroyed the institution of marriage. That's the point. Until semi recently (see 70s+), it wasn't like that.

            [–]MoneyStatusLooks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Good analysis. Totally agree with all of it.

            [–]commenta22 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            You see a lot of cases like this on reddit (and the internet in general, or even day to day discussion). The basics of redpill are pretty obvious and very easy to 'swallow' for most people. It's the more extreme stuff (if you like) which can come off as misogynistic etc - and reading it sometimes it sounds as if it is written with an agenda in mind - which has made the 'branding' toxic (in a similar way to how the current 'wave' of feminism has turned the idea of treated women equally into a bunch of crackpots looking to minimise any gender differences which don't directly benefit women). What do businesses do when their brand becomes toxic? Change their brand name.

            Knock off the extreme ends. Take the core message, rebrand it, and you go from being a woman hating bitter incel to basically saying what a large number of people are starting to figure out for themselves.

            [–]HumbleEngineer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

            The problem reddit has with redpill is the definition of dread game in the context of redpill. Not the action per-se, because everybody does dread game on one level or another, voluntarily or involuntarily. It's the conscient use of dread, that women and BP men see as torture or similar. It's the weaponisation of this natural aspect of relationships. Although I see no problem with dread game as long as it has a goal, I see the problem they have with it, they fear that it may be overused. The remainder of redpill is extremely well accepted within reddit.

            Now, which one of you did this reply? I know it was one of you fuckers =p