all 114 comments

[–][deleted] 173 points174 points  (14 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's why we say women are the gatekeepers to sex and men the gatekeepers to committment. Sluts sell sex cheaply and low value men will give committment at the drop of a hat, and neither are very respected by the other gender.

[–][deleted] 79 points80 points  (1 child)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Or by their own.

[–]Homework_ 17 points18 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

These two comments are especially insightful

[–]permanent_error 24 points25 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

/redpill

[–]adsnell2004 2 points3 points  (0 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I had to think about this for a second and it made complete sense. Almost shock...You are completely right with this simple statement. Holy shit are the gears in my head turning right now...

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

    [–]Pushnikov 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    This isn't a personal assessment. It's a social assessment.

    It doesn't matter if I value someone high or low, the fact is that is what society imposes on people.

    [–]edible_building 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    You're missing the point. Even if you forgo the assessment and let society dictate someone's value, there are still so many variables out there more than "nice" or "slutty." The possibilities become hard to predict. In fact, anyone here who even decides to use certain variables will be biased by the viewpoint or life he or she leads. Any conclusion that is then reached is riddled with bias and would not be an accurate representation of value.

    And the very concept of value is faulty. Why even accept that we should have value? Who said we should have it? Society? Society is made up of individuals, and is not self-aware. And which society do you mean? Do you mean African-Americans? Australians? Al Q'aeda? And there are subcultures within that that are even more complex. Which society are you talking about?

    This sub is built on trying to first break you down, and then building you up to be distrustful of everything and being cynical toward those that disagree. Well, this ain't bootcamp. It's just one philosophy that has no basis on fact or anything scientific. If that is what you want to follow, understand that you're using an either-or fallacy that ignores the rest of the possibilities.

    [–]Pushnikov 5 points6 points  (0 children)

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

    TRP completely accepts that this social existence is all contrived. It is all a system. Like any system it can be played accordingly to achieve the results you want. It is all a social fabrication made by people influenced by a very long history of animal social evolution. So, yes. TRP accepts that immediately, implicitly. It tells people that they are NOT a perfect little snowflake. That the woman they love is not some fantastical unicorn. That we are just viewing the world through a small lens. And then it says, "HERE is the bigger picture".

    People will understand that to varying degrees of success. But when you see that there is no "Deus Ex Machina" for your life - that just "be yourself", "be confident" is not sufficient to resolve all your problems - that you are accountable for your situation, and that you have to be pragmatic if YOU want to be happy because no one else will make that happen for you, at least as a man, then you are a step closer to being aware of your situation.

    To the topic at hand. Value is based on perception. Just as there are a dozen variables that play into someones "nice/slutty" meter - there is even more perceptions. Different groups value different things. That is also part of value. Some people will pay a million dollars for a painting. Other people shake their head in disgust.

    The basic point is that "being a nice guy", as a categorical assessment of your actions as a man is equivalent to "wasting your time and effort for nothing in return." And that the same can be said of women who are "slutty". They are giving something with nothing in return. They are complimentary social status'. That helps guys on this subreddit see themselves in perspective. It will always be their decision if they want to be that "nice guy" or not. But they should be aware of it.

    EDIT :: And although society is made up of individuals, it is "self-aware" by the nature of each part of the society being aware of the society. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looking_glass_self

    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

    You are adorable, youth is wasted on the young.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

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

    [deleted]

      [–]Pushnikov 2 points3 points  (0 children)

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

      I think what he's missing is that there is a "social" value decided her, not a personal value.

      I don't value sluts low, but society does because of the social consciousness.

      [–]rae1988 -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

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

      i think this is more of you projecting onto other people. like, you're assuming all women want a commitment from any man they encounter and its men who act like st. peter preventing the commitments. I've met plenty of women who just want sex and no commitment from any guy. and i've met some women who want no sex and tons of commitment from a plethora of guys.

      like, yeah, the kernel of truth to this whole thread is that any halfway attractive woman can walk into a bar and get laid without even trying, even if she's introverted or boring, etc. but guys need to impress women (or at the very least pique their curiosity) in order to bring them home. But in all honesty, that's really not that big of a deal. as long as a guy throws some money around and has a nice watch, he can get laid by unsavory women without the paranoid manic Red Pill inner dialogue.

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

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

      You read but don't comprehend.

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

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

      Meh, still get laid

      [–]Perrodepaz[S] 35 points36 points  (3 children)

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

      slutzone = friendzone?

      [–]rebuildingMyself 1 point2 points  (2 children)

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

      FWB zone

      [–]wangber 4 points5 points  (1 child)

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

      FWB + friendzone = relationship ?

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

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

      I like to think some common gripes on each side are cancelled out though

      [–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 39 points40 points  (5 children)

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

      It makes perfect sense...

      I think we need a word that's sorta like what slut is to prostitute/hooker because we got a word for a male prostitute (gigolo) but no word for a male slut.

      EDIT: I forgot we call them orbiters.

      Someone once told me the difference between a slut and a hooker is the slut works for free.

      [–]UnpluggedMaestro 37 points38 points  (3 children)

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

      Patrice called em "time ho"

      [–]fuckingkike 34 points35 points  (0 children)

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

      I'm fond of "emotional tampon".

      [–]yamahaR1zombie 9 points10 points  (0 children)

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

      Talkstitute

      [–]jcakmac 30 points31 points  (9 children)

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

      Looking at it from a different perspective you can say that all women "say" they want a nice guy, but they don't really mean it.

      And that all men "say" they want sluts, but don't really mean it. (For the most part)

      [–]frequentlywrong 14 points15 points  (5 children)

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

      I think you are oversimplifying.

      They want a nice guy in the sense they want emotional support. The problem is a guy who provides that and does not demand something in return is a loser and thus unattractive.

      On the other side men want sluts, but they want their woman to be a slut for them not for other guys.

      So yeah the OP is completely correct. Sluts and nice guys are equivalent. They both provide what the other side needs, without demanding their needs are met as well.

      [–]Opioidus 14 points15 points  (1 child)

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

      They want a nice guy in the sense that they think they want a nice guy because they have absolutely no idea what they want and when given the claimed desirable mate they choose the fastest way out.

      Sort of like the virgin omega pony lover who thinks any woman is better than no woman and ''there's nothing wrong with being sexually adventurous'' until he's in a relationship with a slut and has to endure her talking about other guys penis size and how they gave it to her doggy style..

      Guys don't want sluts at all, they just want them as a fuck hole, replacements for their right hands! Nothing entices feelings of protectiveness in an alpha male more than a shy, submissive woman who looks at him with restrained desire and passion. A loud slut with tattoos and shit will only invite pump and dumpers, she might as well just hold up a sign that says easy pussy. The only men willing to commit to such whores are men with no options.

      [–]PlayFair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

      Every guy wants a slut, but a slut who only sluts for him

      [–]JimmyGetzBuckets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

      I think that OP's definition of nice guy is a bit skewed though. A nice guy doesn't necessarily mean some pandering loser that just sits around and listens to women's problems all day. I would say a nice guy is a man that treats women with respect and not just as a sexual object. For instance, I've been called a "nice guy" by many people in my social circle. Yet I go out and look for just casual hookups/sex all the time at parties. I just approach it in a respectful way, and if the woman makes it clear she's not interested then I back off and look for whoever else catches my eye. Basically what I'm trying to say is a nice guy and a beta are two separate things, though there may be overlap

      [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

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

      Untrue. Men want sluts. Women want nice guys. They just don't want them for long term relationships / marriage.

      This is an oversimplification of the range of relationships. Hookups or shoulders to cry on are not everything... people get married, etc. You have to understand that each type of person is ideal for a different type of relationship.

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

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

      good point

      [–]thecajunone 15 points16 points  (4 children)

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

      I'm really glad you came onto this by your own. This is actually a very old theory that we've discussed in the early days of TRP.

      [–]Sunny_McJoyride 6 points7 points  (2 children)

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

      Here's a discussion from 2010 - Are you an Emotional Slut?

      [–]RedFlagsAreGood 9 points10 points  (1 child)

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

      I especially liked this part, which should be required reading:

      It is your job to approach, your job to get the number, to make the call, to set up the date, and to lead her naturally and effortlessly into bed. The woman’s job is simply to show signs of interest and disinterest as well as to accept or reject your advances. However there is one part of the process that you can take a break from and leave entirely to the woman, a part that is strictly hers to lead. That part is the emotional connection. Let her be the one to initiate the cuddling, to seek something “more” such as becoming a boyfriend and girlfriend, to seek out personal and emotional stories about your life that lets her see who you “really” are.

      If women are the gatekeepers of sex and men the gatekeepers of commitment, it only makes sense that it's the man's job to push for sex and the woman's job to push for emotional connection.

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

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

      it only makes sense that it's the man's job to push for sex and the woman's job to push for emotional connection.

      Putting this in my notebook of rules.

      [–]Miamiheat87 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

      Someone mentioned that any posts which go over previous topics should be stamped with "reinforced" or something that let's you know it isn't exactly new.

      I know it's new to some new guys here but I would definitely love some sort of thread marker like that.

      Sometimes I like rereading things that reinforce old concepts. And it'll help others identify the thread if it's new or not.

      [–]NvrGonnaLetUDown 9 points10 points  (0 children)

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

      Time-Ho

      [–]iamme2 18 points19 points  (0 children)

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

      If I can chime in I also have a personal theory that a lot nice guys and sluts do what they do in the hopes of elevating their status. A flawed strategy if you will at becoming who they want to be. A slut believe sleeping around makes her a desirable/lusted after woman while a nice guy hopes that by ass kissing his way into the heart of a good looking woman he will finally be like the alpha males, at least in appearance, if she reciprocates and let's him claim ownership of her pussy.

      [–]ipresentthistoyou 5 points6 points  (1 child)

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

      Patrice O'Neal talks about this very concept here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9QOQNcpuiA

      [–]Pickles17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

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

      Great link. Very informative and hilarious. You are a time-ho dude. You da movie watchin ho, da come over and kill a mouse ho, da let me complain about the dudes I'm fuckin, ho.

      [–]Perrodepaz[S] 10 points11 points  (4 children)

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

      Perhaps think of it as a transaction. Emotional intimacy is a man's currency, physical intimacy a woman's. They are each buying what the other is selling. But if one side is giving away the goods, why pay for what's being given away for free?

      [–]stemgang 6 points7 points  (2 children)

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

      You are on the right track, but it is actually worse than described.

      A prostitute gets paid, and understands her situation.

      An orbiter is unpaid, and lives deluded, thinking he can "win" her love with gifts of attention.

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

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

      An orbiter is unpaid, and lives deluded, thinking he can "win" her love with gifts of attention.

      That's a good one. It's giving the prostitute money and waiting for her to finally reciprocate with sex. Obviously she'll milk that john to the maximum amount he's willing to give away for free.

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

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

      Right. A prostitute at least has the sense to charge for the service. Theres a risk involved to doing what she does so doing it unpaid makes it a stupid profession. The orbiter has never learned to "charge" for his services, its something women have come to know as low value because most of these dudes just give it away. They never learned how to entice and suggest like a slut or a prostitute. Women have had coaching on sex since childhood, its fed to them very early on. They are given a set of general rules that please most every guy. Men can go through their entire life without being properly coached and its sucks to see that. Lot of good dudes out there who just have no role models for this sort of thing.

      [–]Bluntman_Chronic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

      Mind = Blown

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

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

      [deleted]

        [–]Ice-Z 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

        The TL;DR of it is to be confident and at/near the top of one's social sphere. Typically, this is done by increasing the amount of resources at your disposal(money), becoming fit/attractive(lifting), and/or being desired by many women. In general, women are most attracted to status and luckily, there are many ways to increase your status in society(money, fame, social charm, attraction, power). If you have a major shortcoming in one area(like being short), you can easily compensate in another(like being ripped or quite wealthy). Now, you don't have to be a celebrity or in a Forbes magazine to acquire these attributes. They're relative to one's sphere which is why a drug dealer can be "King of the Hood" with $10k and coke while a financial analyst in Manhattan who helps direct millions in capital and be worth $100k wouldn't even be noticeable. If you can't compete on the global sphere(becoming a celeb, being a billionaire, etc), find a niche and get yourself to the top of it. This can be anything where women are(the higher the ratio of women to men, the higher your social demand is) such as the hipster, vegan, bodybuilder, investment banking, soccer, baseball, or tech niches. Anything that has a social sphere surrounding it can be climbed upon and you can reap the rewards once near the top(cult leaders are a great example). Geography is another niche and thus also plays a large part as being even mildly well-off in a region like Southeast Asia will immediately put you in the top 10% of your social sphere(which happens to the be the nation you're in).

        Preferably, most people here on TRP would rather you build yourself up than to simply move into a niche where you can laze about without improvement. You have a very limited amount of time on this planet so you might as well create the best life possible. Read around and learn about topics like preselection, the dangers of modern marriage in Western nations, and charm so you can actively avoid pitfalls and hit lifestyle jackpots. TRP is a very extensive philosophy that would take thousands of pages to fully articulate but the goal of it is to raise your personal status and well-being.

        [–]2emptyform -1 points0 points  (0 children)

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

        Read the sidebar materials. I think "Book of Pook" is a good place to start.

        [–]2emptyform 10 points11 points  (0 children)

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

        I've thought this same thought before, you're on point. That's why all men love sluts and would never slut shame (but plenty of women would), but we would never date a slut. And it's why women love nice guys and always say how much they love them (while most men react with pity or disgust at pussies), but would never date them. Of course, we should thank orbiters for raising our value, and classier women should be thankful for sluts. Girls with low partner counts are VALUABLE, and even more valuable than ever these days because they're so rare. Historically, they have always been right to guard that number carefully. Of course, this is the part of TRP that most modern women cannot accept.

        [–]TRPinitiate 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

        Relationships are, broadly speaking, a trade. The man provides emotional intimacy, the woman provides physical intimacy. A slut is not respected because she provides physical intimacy without requiring emotional intimacy in return. She has sold herself cheap. A "nice-guy" provides emotional intimacy to a woman without requiring physical intimacy in return. He has sold himself cheap, and likewise is not respected.

        This is one of the most basic and core principles, imo, that drives TRP. Glad to see it so eloquently articulated. :)

        That's why we say women are the gatekeepers to sex and men the gatekeepers to commitment. Sluts sell sex cheaply and low value men will give commitment at the drop of a hat, and neither are very respected by the other gender.

        Succinct and accurate.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

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

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

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

          Could you give a TL;DR?

          [–]Perrodepaz[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

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

          My dimestore evo-psych;

          Traditionally, women have depended heavily on men for survival. In times of extreme hardship or trouble, having a man (Alpha or not) who is emotionally invested in a woman could be the difference between life and death for her. Women may be able to provide for themselves in our modern world, but they haven't lost the instictual pull at the back of their brains to desire a man's emotional investment. And that instinctive desire is different and distinct from "gina tingles".

          [–]monsieurhire2 2 points3 points  (2 children)

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

          "Relationships are, broadly speaking, a trade. The man provides emotional intimacy, the woman provides physical intimacy."

          No, a "relationship" should be a bilateral trade, where both parties trade physical and emotional intimacy with each other.

          Think about it. If the woman you have sex with isn't also emotionally intimate with you, then she could also be shtupping a bazillion other guys, none of whom she's emotionally intimate with. Also, conversely, if you're having sex with her, but you're not emotionally intimate with her, it may mean you don't like her. BTW, being emotionally intimate does not equal being a beta bitch.

          [–]Perrodepaz[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

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

          I simplified for the sake of clarity. I absolutely agree that the trade is not so black/white. But I still think as a general rule, it holds. What women mainly want is emotional intimacy, men physical.

          Women can get sex easily, yet still often have a difficult time getting emotional investment from men. For men it's the opposite. Many guys who can't get a girlfriend have no difficulty at all getting a girl friend. I think this reflects the relative value each sex places on emotional/physical intimacy.

          [–]monsieurhire2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

          Getting a woman just for sex is not worth the trouble, in my opinion. If you want sex, just masturbate. If you have no feelings for the other person, you are in essence, wrangling them into being a giant masturbation device. It's just not worth the trouble . . . unless they do shit for you, like feed you soup when you're sick, help you run errands, you know, make your life easier. Of course, I'm over 30, so I've been to the candy-store and back, and I'm about as jaded as a British colonel. The sex when there is emotional investment is so night and day beyond regular sex for the sake of orgasm, that it's very difficult to go back once you've experienced it.

          [–]SpinalArt 3 points4 points  (3 children)

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

          Both have daddy issues and both need external help to get over those issues.

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

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

          I think nice guys have mommy issues.

          [–]blazingblue16 0 points1 point  (1 child)

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

          I think it's a mix of both.

          [–]jhthm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

          Nice guy here. Can confirm.

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

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

          i guess there is some truth. but a person that only desires emotional intimacy OR physical pleasure seems like half a person. women DO get horny and guy's do like having some emotional comfort. the trick is finding balance between the two traits. if a guy is showing he obviously enjoys spending time with a girl, the girl may interpret that he likes her and having sex may ruin that. (based on most girls experience, by the time they're 20 they've probably had sex that they've regret. at least once or twice) girls logic is that when a guy finally gets a girl in bed, he becomes bored with her.

          it's not that "nice" isn't appreciated, it's just how the majority of guys are. by being "nice" you have surrendered the battle and declared that you like her. what a guy should strive to be is an interesting character that captivates and thrills. make her scream! scare her shock her spook her etc. you shouldn't be out to make her comfortable around you. once she feels comfortable and that no more effort is required to retain your attraction, the war is over, she has already starting texting her friends "yuppp hes totally into me!" having sex at that point would betray her conscious.

          however, the win loss record never matters. what's important is that you continually go out meet new people make mistakes, learn from said mistakes, and apply what you learned to the next relationships you make.

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

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

          "Nice guys" are simply trying to validate their masculinity, by indulging in their infantile male-mother need. Unlike the traditionalists, who offer their resources to women in exchange for sex (they know how women operate). "Nice guys" are foolish enough to think that women actually believe men to be human beings, with their own goals and dreams in life.

          [–]W-Z-R 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

          OP gets it

          A nice guy's emotional intimacy is worth very little because of how much he provides it, like a country over-inflating its currency.

          [–]Endorsed ContributorOccamsUsername 2 points3 points  (1 child)

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

          I sent OPs post with slight edits to a feminist coworker. Going to be so good.

          [–]Perrodepaz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

          This could be entertaining. Please keep us updated on the results.

          [–]Fsicx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          this is totally true, mostly because of the consequence of it. after a while that same Nice Guy will be discarded and replaced with an Alpha male...as long as there is no Alpha Male, Nice Guys are " A DICK IN A GLASS CASE ". just like Chris Rock said

          [–]snwborder52 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Yep. They both ooze neediness, with different results.

          [–]neofau 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          [–]pwrfull 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Makes total sense

          [–]miichaelmchugh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          yes, very much

          [–]cbeeman15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          So this is why I never get any "poon," I'm a slut.

          [–]headless_bourgeoisie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          You just blew my mind.

          [–]rickaboy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          [–]themasterof 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Wow I have never thought if it like that. Quite the mind blow actually.

          [–]manicmojo 0 points1 point  (1 child)

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

          So twerking would be the equivalent to a guy cradling a girl whilst dancing. Which sort of works.. Hmm, and a kiss is middleground as it leads both ways, to sex, and to commitment.

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

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

          i don't think showing signs of vulnerability is a terrible thing. in moderation it can be very useful in determining how much your partner respects you. cradling a girl while slow dancing can be a romantic thing that both guy and girl enjoy. if there was enough happening beforehand to warrant the closeness. don't be insecure, be aware.

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

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

          Does this make any sense?

          It makes every sense. I like this Nice guys = Sluts. Quick, easy to understand, should be in the sidebar if you ask me.

          Explains the lack of respect women have for nice guys beautifully. Actually some of ''best of 2013'' should be in the sidebar too.

          [–]Stalwart_Shield 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Such a great post explaining a topic I was just struggling to grasp, and here it is fully fleshed out, and this has made another thing clear to me.

          Only settle down in a relationship when you find someone that can provide for your physical AND emotional needs. All these pretty faces that end up turning into pump and dumps end up that way because they have the emotional development of a highschool girl (even at 20+ years out of HS).

          But every guy needs to learn to pick up at least enough alpha traits to be able to tell the difference between true girlfriend material versus shined up turds that are going to try to pull the wool over you eyes about past indiscretion.

          Any time a decent guy goes and marries what I recognize as a reformed-slut I can't help but shed a single manly tear because she's won. She got to be the party girl when she was young, then trick her prince charming into giving her the life she always dreamed of settling into later in life. Rather than working for that life like the rest of us have to.

          [–]CallMeMrBadGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Makes sense. I remember Patrice speaking on this. Though, I listened to so much of his material that I dont know where to find it.

          [–]DrForbin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

          Have just discovered this Redpill thing, got interested and started reading up on it. Read your post here and this is how I feel:

          https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFOi0aeVHmyfhZWDlqWjbBN9KrwTn9J205JvI364nGGMSOsbTb

          [–][deleted]  (3 children)

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

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted]  (2 children)

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

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

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

              my wife has learned to be physically responsive to anything I ask, and I am emotionally available anytime she has asked.

              This is the reason that when she isn't giving sex to you the best responses are:

              1) Go cold(withdraw what you're selling)

              2) Dread (sell it to someone else)

              [–]d6x1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

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

              Mind blown

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

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

              The practical aspect of all this is to think of your emotional investment like a vagina (I know that sounds weird but go with me on this).

              It's something you have and control that women crave. Women are no more entitled to it than you are entitled to their sex. Make them work for what they want.

              [–]rae1988 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

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

              son, i think you just went full autistic. never go full autistic.

              [–]Macatak89 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

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

              I am very new to the community, discovered it after posting a complaint about how often I get friend zoned. Something that I have implemented in the few days since I have come here is asking why I was put in the friend zone. Based on the answer, we either remain friends if they are honest and straight forward about the reasons, or, I dont waste my time on them if they give me some BS reasoning or dance around the question. Simple as that. If they can't respect me enough to take a second of honest reflection to figure out why they dont want to be with me, they dont deserve my friendship or affection.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

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

              It's possible they honestly don't know why they friendzoned you. They "just don't see you THAT way". Women very often don't have a good grasp themselves of why they do the things they do.

              [–]Macatak89 1 point2 points  (0 children)

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

              Well there is always an actual reason. I refuse to accept a cop out like that.

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

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

              Comment of the Week - Precision Analogies Edition

              Now men don’t want a relationship with a woman who is promiscuous with her sexual intimacy as it either indicates she has low value, or potential for cuckoldry.

              Perhaps women don’t want relationships with emotional/sensitive guys as these men are promiscuous with their emotional intimacy. And their emotional promiscuity indicates they are either low value or have a potential for abandonment.

              So a niceguy is to women, what a slut is to a man.

              Now, when you here feminist therapists telling men they they should be more sensitive and get in touch with their feminine side and what not, those therapists are no different from some old sleazy lecher trying to convince women that it’s in their best interest to sleep around and experiment with their sexuality in the hopes that the woman will sleep with them.

              Women have harems too

              The punch line for those who need a motivation to read my further rambling – or a reason not to – is that from an intersexual behavior standpoint, the male equivalent of a slut is the beta orbiter. Modernity has turned sexuality into a buffet: what used to be a loving commitment for life to a particular person, where sexual intimacy and provision formed the mutual society of a family, has turned into cafeteria sexuality wherein people are encouraged to assemble their ideal virtual mate from the disparate contributions of different real people. Like the slut who gives away her sexuality on the cheap, accepting sexual attention with no commitment or provision, the beta orbiter gives away his provision and commitment without any corresponding receptivity to his sexual attentions.

              Just as the cad doesn’t feel a social sting for having his harem of sluts, LJBF-girl doesn’t feel a social sting for having her harem of beta orbiters. And what follows, I think, is that things will just keep getting worse unless and until fewer women engage in slutty behavior and fewer men engage in beta orbiting behavior. Shaming the cads isn’t going to work.

              [–]steakmeout -5 points-4 points  (12 children)

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

              The idea that you define people by what they do and don't share in completely subjetive and specifically subjetively negative contexts is pretty selfish and sad. There's a definite air of insecurity in the way you seem to single out and define "nice-guy" as a pejorative term to besmirch with a negative connotation of being "easy", as if to say that being "easy" with good cheer and pleasant behaviour is bad.

              It's also a lie. You're trying to turn the tables on reason and logic and supplant them with a fiction where being a mean spirited, selfish person is somehow the better person than someone who is neither.

              A person who is a proudly belligerent jerk is not actually a more authentic male, just a more authentic, belligerent jerk. If such ugly behaviour were to be used in other contexts beyond the context of finding a sex partner or mate it would also rightly be identified as rude and unnattractive just as it is here.

              Trying being a pig headed, unpleasant person with males at work and see how many of them actually want to work with you regularly. And don't try and tell me that rude jokes, backslaps or playful punches are the same as not being nice, because that would be complete rubbish. The language may be different, but the context is not. Being pleasant is what's expected and it doesn't matter which sex you're dealing with.

              It's sad for you that can't feel authentic being nice. Clearly you have some demons to wrestle with.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 3 points4 points  (11 children)

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

              I appreciate the rebuttal, although the ad-hominems were unnecessary.

              The kind of attention women seek from men goes farther than simply being pleasant or civil. It's a "hey, look at me" mentality. It's extra attention. Men have no obligation to provide it.

              [–]steakmeout -2 points-1 points  (10 children)

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

              You're whole diatribe is defined by ad hom. You literally define nice men as "easy sluts". If you deal in the pejorative be prepared to be dealt with in the same manner.

              And you clearly don't understand what it is that women want at all. You define them as a collective, rather than as the individuals they really are and that means that all you see them as is what you classify their desires as being and meaning. That's a form of delusion.

              You're clearly very limited in experience. I hope, for your sake, you divest yourself of these poorly researched and contrived ideas. They aren't helping you at all. They are just confusing you.

              As I said, try being an ass to everyone, regardless of the gender, and see what it gets you because you'll learn that this delienation you've made between nice and not nice and beta and alpha is entirely arbitrary.

              We all make arbitrary delineations, it's how we map the world out around us but the context of growth and maturation is dependant on constantly redressing those delineations and if you only navigate the world by a map which you don't update you're liable to constantly find yourself lost and confused.

              Lost and confused is exactly how you sound. Show some real bravery and step beyond the illusions you're projecting in your childish diatribe.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 0 points1 point  (9 children)

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

              You don't seem to know the meaning of the words "ad hominem" or "diatribe", and most of your post is nothing more than a weak attempt at shaming. I like rebuttals, that's part of the reason I made the post, to find flaws with the concept. However, you've clearly taken it personally and rather than find real flaws in the idea (which I would welcome) you've decided to do the concerned/insult thing, instead. This is very immature and just...weak. The idea is the idea, it stands or falls on its own merit, my shortcomings are irrelevent.

              "As I said, try being an ass to everyone, regardless of the gender, and see what it gets you..." This is just repeating an argument that's already been dealt with. I never said be unkind to anyone. What is being discussed is emotional investment, extra attention...not civility or lack of it.

              "And you clearly don't understand what it is that women want at all. You define them as a collective,..." This is the only paragraph of your diatribe (I used the word correctly) with any real content. Yes, the OP is a generalization, it's not going to apply 100% of the time. One can make observations on the general behaviour of groups of individuals. People like sociologists and political scientists do it all the time. Are you angry at them?

              "And you clearly don't understand what it is that women want at all." Why don't you enlighten us?

              [–]steakmeout -2 points-1 points  (8 children)

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

              Oh please. You cannot claim intellectual superiority, nor that you do not use ad hom when your entire idea is based around a character assasination of a group of people whose innocent behaviour you attempt to shape as a negative context which somehow worsens your life.

              You are literally dealing in ad hom when you single out a group of people as "nice guys" and define them "sluts". That is literally a "to the man" attack based on defining people in a pejorative context. And you're doing so AS IF THEY ARE MAKING THE CLAIM THAT BEING NICE GUYS IS THE BEST WAY TO BE WRT TO GETTING WOMEN. AS IF THESE SUPPOSED NICE GUYS HAVE RUINED IT FOR YOU. You fucking pussy. You fucking passive aggressive, pseudo intellectual, ineffectual, likely overly effiminate (I bet you love your skinny jeans and oversized hair) completely socially inept pansy.

              Of course you try and elevate your lizard brain scramblings with professionals who are qualified to discuss groups whose behavioral patterns they quantify and scrutinise. Of course you do. I mean look at your first post. You appeal to authority because you KNOW it's a BS claim but you ask for confirmation bias from audience who is drinking the same watered down koolaid. Pussies like you.

              As to what women want? Well, I don't claim to define females as a group. I leave that up to this passive aggressive sideshow you call a subreddit.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

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

              Wow, you seem very angry. It reads as intellectual frustration because my post offends you but you can't form a coherent rebuttal. So you throw a temper tantrum instead.

              [–]steakmeout -2 points-1 points  (6 children)

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

              Of course you don't read that as a rebuttal. You're mired in confirmation bias. And of course you can't deal with real aggression, you prefer fictionalised passive aggression where faceless groups ruin your life.

              Wuss.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

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

              You are the one that keeps throwing personal insults, while hidden safely behind your keyboard.

              I guess that and lame strawmen is all you have.

              [–]steakmeout -1 points0 points  (4 children)

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

              Again, this from a person whose whole argument is that faceless people who do good things with good cheer are making his life harder and should therefore be insulted using chauvanistic terminology.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

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

              "...argument is that faceless people who do good things with good cheer are making his life harder..."

              The "lame strawman" I was talking about.

              [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

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

              In a very warped way?

              The perpetual nice guy / friend zone candidate typically arrives at that point from a beta complex and general cowardice (y'know, the status of being so dishonest that you wont share your basic feelings with someone else, and even try and excuse the behavior on the part of how it might effect her? Are you shitting me?) where as the "slut" is generally very successful and forward.

              [–]Perrodepaz[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

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

              But is the slut successful? If what she is after is emotional intimacy. It's like saying the nice guy is successful because he made a friend.

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

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

              Ted moesby