all 157 comments

[–]Endorsed ContributorAerobus 116 points117 points  (8 children)

It's especially funny because these guys think they are intelligent, but the minute you put the words "red" and "pill" in any one of those comments they immediately go crazy and think of the advice as utter garbage.

[–][deleted] 56 points57 points  (2 children)

Brain washing. Just mention a certain keyword and people stop logically thinking about your arguments and instead damn you to hell.

[–]EdwardoSuperTramp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Careful now, reddit is mighty fond of it's circle jerks..

[–]HerculestheRed 16 points17 points  (0 children)

"Red" "pill" "rp" "trp" "That-Sub-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named"

"Trigger words" are just normal words that trigger your "I'm mentally incapable of processing reality. Insert comfort immediately." process.

Goddamned socially programmed robots with a whine that oil won't fix because it's a "feature, not a problem."

[–]smoothjazzanarchist 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Who cares? It's not like I want everyone to be reading the red pill. The community is big enough and giving it extra attention isn't exactly in our best interests.

I'm not preaching the word of god here

[–]needmorefat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's pretty true here too though. You can say something sensible and get upvotes and be called insightful, but if you frame the same things as pro-feminism everyone will criticize it.

General theory of human behavior - if you want to say something controversial, don't trigger the "politics" lobe.

[–]Ratcheta 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It would be interesting if in some small corners we pulled a switcheroo and convinced people that TRP is 100% for all that Feminism and dissonance and etc and get them to disagree and take our actual side.

I mean, it would slander our name but I'm curious of the reaction.

[–]smoothjazzanarchist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You'd end up attracting a shit ton of people to TBP.

[–]manslutalt 197 points198 points  (6 children)

  1. Get them wet.
  2. Treat them like dirt.

They'll stick like mud.

So much wisdom in so few words.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

    unfortunately, this happens for me when trying to GET RID of a chick..

    [–]wakingslowdiver 272 points273 points  (32 children)

    ''Never hire women of child bearing age. They take too much time off work to look after the kids. Hire a man instead.''

    alright, which one of you posted that ??

    [–]denmaur 72 points73 points  (5 children)

    I could have posted that five or six times. Then I switched to hiring older women. They take off for doctor's appointments, grandchildren, husband's doctor's appointments. Rarely do you find a woman who sincerely cares about her career. It's just a job to most of them.

    [–]Purpledrank 21 points22 points  (3 children)

    The amount of sick time that women call out on is ridiculously high: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4241746

    I guess for men they like to just rough it out. For women, they love being the seen as a victim of something. Calling in sick just rewards that "I'm frail look at me I'm a victim" instinct.

    [–]bdub85 7 points8 points  (1 child)

    I think I called out once this year because I felt like absolute death. I very rarely call out. I always see other chicks in my office calling out for no damn reason. They are just "sick" or have some bs appointment.

    [–]the_number_2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I've taken 3 sick days in four and a half years. One was because I woke up and immediately ran to the bathroom throwing up; I think it was something I ate, but who knows.

    The other was after I rolled my ankle and literally could not walk on it for two days (well, three days, but that third day was a holiday anyway).

    Anything short of that, I don't take off.

    [–]RecQuery 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    While using made up bullshit 'manflu' to shame men. It reeks of projection.

    [–]Solitary_Wolf 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    Alan Sugar has been very open about his stance on this for years.

    [–]MachineGunTeacher 18 points19 points  (1 child)

    As a teacher, each year brings in a new crop of female teachers. They have 100% work attendance for the first two years until they get tenure. Then they all start taking time off to pop out babies. And during those multiple weeks off of work the classrooms are filled with substitutes. Two of our three math teachers took so many weeks off that more than 3/4 of the students had to take the math classes over because they learned nothing.

    [–]ErrandAlchemist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I remember lamenting the worst science teacher in our school getting tenure and one of the best being shipped and the only difference I could make out was that the one who got it was pregnant.

    [–]FruitNyer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    I have a female employee, can confirm this was actually a problem til she got the real life ban hammer. Learned a little more about life and bills and later begged for her job back. Hired her back after she showed she was actually going to work this time.

    [–]Cacciaguida 25 points26 points  (26 children)

    "All women have very round about ways of getting what they want that are very inconsiderate of other people's feelings or future plans, typically his is just the nature of being a woman and these manipulations aren't too common but in this day and age where television has prescribed role models for women that are essentially beings that can do no wrong and break all the rules without consequence we have a lot of anti social women that don't care if they ruin someones life and particularly enjoy making dramatic schemes because television has normalized and conditioned them to search out drama for entertainment.

    Also, don't marry a slut, she'll leave you and ruin your children."

    Very nice. This user have a red pill sockpuppet?

    edit: Oop, looked further down the comment history. It is a fellow rper!

    [–]luxo42 1 point2 points  (25 children)

    I know this is off topic, but can you explain TRP's reasoning behind the whole not marrying a slut issue? I've been tempted to make a thread about it, but maybe someone can just answer me here.

    I understand that marrying someone with a higher partner count increases the risk of divorce, but why is that the only risk factor considered? It is not the biggest predictor of divorce, but it seems to be the only one people focus on. Is there are reason beyond just being disgusted with sluts in general?

    [–]Cacciaguida 5 points6 points  (5 children)

    they are more likely to cheat. Old habits die hard.

    [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Yes, I should have included cheating along with marriage. If there are bigger predictors of infidelity/divorce than partner count, shouldn't these predictors be mentioned as well?

    [–]Baylien2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    If a 25 year old woman has had more than 20 partners chances are she cheated and will cheat again. She also may be a nympho and they cheat too

    [–]TheWeepingMan -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

    I never understood that either. Cheating in a relationship =/= fucking around while single. Holds for men as well.

    [–]Sadpanda596 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Doesn't necessarily translate but there is a decent correlation. Personally, I've never been cheated on and never even remotely thought that a girl would cheat on me. I suscribe to the theory that if you get cheated on you weren't awesome enough - I mean girls get lovey dovey feelings so fast its a joke.

    I prefer to date sluts because they're into more freaky shit in the bedroom. You guys can keep your motionless virgins.

    [–]ErrandAlchemist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Do what comes naturally as our civilization dies.

    [–]2 Mredpillschool 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    Think about a woman who loves to travel. She's been to at least 4 different countries and enjoys other cultures. The question you ask is- for somebody who craves different cultures and different people and different food but won't stay in one place, why do you think your little town will satisfy her for the rest of her life?

    Once somebody has entered into that way of life, you will never capture their attention for long.

    [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I don't particularly like to speculate beyond the naked science, but regardless, we both agree that a high partner count increases the odds of divorce. Also, I don't think I was clear with my question, so let me elaborate further.

    Considering past partner count is useful when you can 1.) accurately identify the sexual histories of prospective spouses and 2.) have a source of non-affected partners available. This may be possible in some circumstances, but is unrealistic in others. TRP holds the view that the partner count for an average woman is very high. Assuming the accuracy of this statement, then it may be near impossible to avoid this particular risk for divorce.

    Perhaps this is partly why TRP suggests just not to get married at all. Good advice for some, but there might be other options for those insistent on marriage. After all, some of the risk factors for divorce can be directly controlled. Since we can curb any of our own behaviors that may contribute to the risk of divorce, why focus on the one predictor that is so difficult to identify and avoid? Some of these risk factors are even bigger predictors than past partner count. Wouldn't it be useful to at least mention these as well?

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

    I think it's the type of hookups, personally. If she's a one-night-stander, you're in for a bad time. If she's serially monogamous, I think that's a better sign. The number is less relevant than their mindset.

    I know the type of girl to avoid when I meet them. Flighty, free spirit, gets what she wants, focused on only her own happiness full-time. She's the one who rides the cock carousel for the buzz of finding new cock.

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 3 points4 points  (15 children)

    Women burn out their ability to produce oxytocin (the chemical in the brain responsible for bonding) in great enough quantities the more sexual partners they have. This doesn't happen to men. Sluts can't form strong bonds and thus don't stay in any one relationship. The same lack of oxytocin also drastically affects their ability to be a good parent.

    [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Male bonding doesn't appear to be connected with oxytocin from what little I've read about the subject. I could be wrong though, do you have the original article? I don't expect the biology behind bonding to be the same for men and women, so it doesn't surprise me that there is a different in response between the two genders.

    Although men don't have the same bonding mechanism as women, interestingly enough, multiple past partners also increases their risk of infidelity, marital dissatisfaction, and divorce. Here are a couple of articles on that if you are interested. 1 2 3

    So it seems that either way, people with an extensive sexual pasts are more at risk for relationship problems.

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    [–]luxo42 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Thanks. I'm not a big fan of dailymail, so I tried finding the original study they referenced. It appears not be available to the public, but I found a summary of the findings from the National Marriage Project here

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Excellent sleuthing. Thanks mate.

    [–]1WishIHadMyOldUsernam 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    This sounds like a great explanation but do you have any sources to back it up?

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    Oxytocin is a hormone that is released in a woman during childbirth, nursing a child, and during sexual activity. Commonly referred to as "glue," oxytocin creates a strong bond between the woman and the other involved. In the case of childbirth and nursing this bond is important because it creates a nurturing environment for the child. In a marriage relationship where sex is safe and beneficial, oxytocin helps keep the bond between a husband and wife strong. Outside of marriage however, the oxytocin bond can increase the emotional pain when the relationship has ended. Oxytocin is impartial. Whether during sexual activity between husband and wife or in a teenage hook-up, the hormone is still released and the bond is still created. Oxytocin promises an involuntary chemical commitment.

    Every parent, educator, and school administrator can undertake the mission of teaching abstinence with heightened significance as the intensity of the oxytocin bond explains why teens suffer emotionally after breakups, and often even during a relationship. Sex was created to unite two people, bringing a bond unlike any other relationship. This powerful bond is what sustains husband and wife until "death do us part" contributing to trust and security. Outside of marriage the release of oxytocin can lead to distrust, hostility, and insecurity. Sexual relationships without commitment still have a lasting bond. Oxytocin even has the power to sustain attachment within abusive relationships.

    Oxytocin also helps females bond with men. When a woman and man touch each other in a loving way, oxytocin is released in her brain. It makes her want more of that loving touch, and she begins to feel a bond with her partner. Sexual intercourse leads to the release of even more oxytocin, a desire to repeat the contact, and even stronger bonding. But, like dopamine, oxytocin is values-neutral. It's a chemical reaction, or, as the authors write: "[I]t is an involuntary process that cannot distinguish between a one-night stand and a lifelong soul mate. Oxytocin can cause a woman to bond to a man even during what was expected to be a short-term sexual relationship." So when that short-term relationship ends, the emotional fallout can be devastating, thanks to oxytocin.

    I've seen some other research but I can't find it right now. The jist here is that the more that bond is created over meaningless one night stands the more it becomes associated with an unhealthy sexual lifestyle as opposed to something that is released with people she has a desire to mate with long term.

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    Btw that was from: The Oxytocin Factor (Kerstin Uvnas-Moberg, 2003, Aspire, Scott Phelps, 2008, The Medical Institute of Sexual Health, 2006).

    [–]1WishIHadMyOldUsernam 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    If I'm reading you right, it's that the woman essentially becomes immune to the effects of oxytocin as she gets flooded with it from multiple different sources over repeated one night stands, resulting in reduced connection with later partner(s). Is that pretty much the gist of it?

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Like building a tolerance to a drug, yes.

    [–]LeggyBlueEyes -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

    That hormone is only released upon orgasm. So if she had lots of shitty partners who couldn't get her off then you are safe!

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Not true. It is released with all kinds of intimate touch. Unless you are suggesting that a woman gets orgasms from her babies...

    [–]LeggyBlueEyes 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    It is released when the uterus contracts with childbirth. It is also released during nursing, which also triggers the uterus to contact. It doesn't just release willy nilly with physical touch. If it did everyone would be bonded with everyone all over the place.

    [–]hacksaw_elusive 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Men release it when playing team sports.

    [–]LeggyBlueEyes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This has only been suggested as a theory. Not yet proven, from everything I've read.

    [–]1redpillbanana 99 points100 points  (24 children)

    Current top comment is pure dark triad, with bonus Ben Franklin effect in the replies:

    Put yourself first. Most people you go out of your way for won't do the same for you.

    Current #2 comment is almost RP:

    Don't be yourself. Yourself is a socially awkward asshole. Pretend to be a polite charming person.

    I like the direction this one is taking - don't be yourself, be someone more successful than yourself.

    But I would reword it as:

    Don't be yourself. Yourself is a socially awkward polite person. Pretend to be a charming asshole.

    And further down is this RP gem:

    No one's born special. The world owes you nothing. Most people don't achieve their dreams. Do the best you can.

    [–]Dorrog 42 points43 points  (23 children)

    How is putting yourself first Dark Triad? Being selfish does not mean you are into any of the dark triad personalities necessarily. And putting yourself first does not even mean you are selfish.

    Sometimes I think that some people here have been so submissive and pushed over that when they look for themselves they think they are being the shit, when in reality they are just starting to act normal.

    [–]ham_starr 103 points104 points  (14 children)

    The "dark triad" fuckery all over TRP is fucking stupid.

    [–]450k_crackparty 76 points77 points  (10 children)

    Agreed. Some douche awhile back started their post with "I'm a bit of a dark triad so...". Fuck off, sounds like you're playing dress up.

    [–]HobKing 21 points22 points  (0 children)

    It's cringeworthy. It sounds like they wear only black and red clothes and eyeliner.

    [–]Dopebear 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    Taking care of yourself, not taking shit from others and putting one's own best interests first above all else's = dark triad apparently. It's the 'cool' and 'hip' thing on here.

    [–]HatredsBlazingGun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    dark triad

    BRB, going to find out exactly what this shit is.

    Edit: Welp, I'm 0 for 3 on the dark triad stuff. Looks like I'm just an asshole.

    [–]1redpillbanana 1 point2 points  (6 children)

    One definition of being selfish is being "concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure" which is putting yourself first.

    Someone who considers his interests worthy of being put first might be considered a narcissist, and also might have less empathy towards others (or might be able to selectively turn off that empathy), a sign of psychopathy.

    Someone who is Machiavellian would find a way to increase his own profit and pleasure as a side effect of making everyone else feel good too (e.g. politicians).

    [–]CryptoManbeard 20 points21 points  (1 child)

    I'm going to side with /u/dorrog , putting yourself first is not being DT. Putting yourself first by manipulating other people or by not caring if you totally fuck someone else over is being DT.

    Being selfish is not the same as being psychopathic or narcissistic.

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

    What you say makes sense and I stand corrected as I mentioned below.

    Thank you for your reasoned response.

    [–]Dorrog 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    No, putting your interests first by itself does not mean you are a narcissists at all. Narcissism implies much more.

    And yes, psicopaths and maquiavelans put themselves first, but so do a lot of people who don't fit there. Narcissists don't even do that all the time, they can be very dumb. My point is that it makes no sense to say that just because you put yourself first you are dark triad. It's ridiculous.

    [–]1redpillbanana 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I'll concede that putting yourself first is a necessary component of dark triad but not a sufficient one.

    OTOH it is the most important component of dark triad in my arrogant opinion.

    One of the strongest social narratives throughout the world is that of self-sacrifice, e.g. soldiers who are killed in action are honored, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country", etc. To go against this narrative is very antisocial (or even a sign of psychopathy), and this is why wealthy businesses and businessmen have to donate to charity to improve their PR.

    [–]vox_veritas 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    and this is why wealthy businesses and businessmen have to donate to charity to improve their PR.

    Actually one of the main reasons they donate to charity is to lower their tax obligation, which is itself a self-interested reason.

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

    They can get the tax deduction without being public about it. There's a reason for gold- and silver-level donor lists.

    [–]SeekingAlpha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    People are moving the goal posts.

    Put others first, then yourself is the new ideal for the weak minded.

    [–]kinggluejar 49 points50 points  (3 children)

    Some things are true yet controversial or politically incorrect. Is that not the definition of trp?

    [–]xtc99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Probably as close and concise as any.

    [–]through_a_ways 50 points51 points  (1 child)

    Nothing turns a girl on more than the sight of you beating up another guy.

    Maybe the sight of you fucking other girls, arguably.

    [–]TheWeepingMan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Nothing turns a girl on more than the sight of you beating up another guy of at least your own size & weight.

    Fixed. Doesn't need to include some actual fist-work, if you can verbally wreck someone bigger & stronger than you, you're still the champ.

    [–]TheAssh0le 35 points36 points  (6 children)

    Lots of Laws of Power in there.

    Hide your intentions. Use selective honesty. Destroy your enemy completely. Get others to do work for you. Avoid the unlucky or unhappy. Be the perfect courtier.

    That's not even the first 200 comments.

    [–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    Like I said, it's a goldmine.

    [–]blackbloodedgypsy 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Can you please explain the laws of power reference, is that a book?

    [–]TheAssh0le 6 points7 points  (3 children)

    48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene. It's an amoral summarization of various philosophical, political, and military strategy works. Considered required reading around here.

    [–]blackbloodedgypsy 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    Duly noted and appreciated. Thanks for the response. I'll pick it up this week.

    [–]linkfoo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Last month someone started posting one law a day in a TRP thread. I've been rereading the book a chapter a day and following along. Some decent discussion there.

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 33 points34 points  (18 children)

    The first thing you learn in sales is that people often associate things with specific words, thus by presenting something in a different fashion, you achieve different results.

    Reddit hears TRP and relates it to men's rights and pick up shit.

    When phrased in a way that makes them feel comfortable they readily gobble it up.

    And this is why it's important how we spread the message around reddit. If you come in throwing your dick around and engaging in arguments then you're confirming their beliefs.

    Men want to come here. They really do. You merely have to open the door, no need to force them in it

    [–]through_a_ways 26 points27 points  (3 children)

    "Heavy metals" vs "100% naturally occurring minerals"

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]through_a_ways 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Selenium is still 1000x better than lead, arsenic, cadmium, or mercury.

      [–]wakingslowdiver 14 points15 points  (2 children)

      no need to open the door for them. they want to be beta's let them be, you can only save those that want to come here.

      ''When phrased in a way that makes them feel comfortable''

      NO, the harsh tone is needed to keep special snowflakes/tumblerinas away. Look what happened to r/askmen, most questions are answered by women.

      [–]TheeRyanGrey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      You don't need to tell me. Anyone who has read my stuff knows I'm very blunt snd offensive.

      But again, we need more tools in the kit Then that. I'm just a dumb ass caveman, nothing more.

      [–]hacksaw_elusive 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I think he means packaging it a lil more digestible when u comment rp truths outside this sub. That way they agree with the truth before realizing it's RP. Inside the sub im all for keeping things harsh and blunt to keep the bitches out.

      [–]MightyTaint 4 points5 points  (3 children)

      And this is why it's important how we spread the message around reddit.

      Why is it important to spread the message around and get as many people possible to try to follow it? Unless someone is my family member or close friend, I really don't give a shit if they want to shoot themselves in the foot, and the more half-assed people attempting RP and failing makes the rest of us look bad.

      [–]Ormild 9 points10 points  (2 children)

      I realized it's becoming more and more true. You mention pickup and people go crazy. You have to use more PC terms like "dating advice" and "self improvement" and "be attractive" because that's what pick up advice boils down to:

      Become more socially savvy.

      Lift and dress better.

      Focus on yourself first.

      Stop giving a fuck about what other people think.

      [–]TheeRyanGrey 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      People need to be coddled. I don't coddle but we as a group must.

      I'm the hammer in the toolkit but we need a fuck ton of other, more important tools.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [deleted]

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

        If someone has so much time on their hands that they can browse through my history to find things to hate about me that's their problem. It's not worth the effort to hide my opinions, whether it's about guns, politics, TRP, or firmly believing Darryl on The Walking Dead needs to die.

        [–]TheeRyanGrey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I know alot of people do but I want everyone's hate. I want to show them their own hypocrisy.

        I don't mind being the poster child for everything people think they loathe. I can handle it.

        [–]hiphoprising 22 points23 points  (6 children)

        They should clarify that it needs to be a justified ass whooping. I would say the majority of women aren't interested in a guy that only goes out to fight.

        [–]Dorrog 16 points17 points  (4 children)

        It works short term with more women that you would believe. But it gets old very quick. Plus it's a moronic way of hooking up, you don't need to risk your life to score some pussy.

        [–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (3 children)

        Its a beta male thing to get into fights for no real reason. Shows a true lack of emotional regulation. The alpha male is the one who is in control of their own life, getting violent takes away control for most of us.

        [–]1WishIHadMyOldUsernam 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        Betas get into fights over stupid shit that doesn't have any real bearing on your life, and usually because they lost control of the situation long before. Alphas get into fights when their life, liberty, property, or sacred honor are on the line, and only after all other possible avenues have been exhausted.

        Shying away from a fight because "alphas don't do that" just makes you an omega.

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

        for no real reason.

        The true alpha in the modern age can usually read properly.

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

        Yep. They can also usually tell when someone is agreeing with them and fleshing out their thoughts for others to continue the conversation.

        [–]Newdist2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Does your body react when you see a very attractive young woman take her shirt off?

        Women's bodies react in an equivalent way when they see a fit dude beat the hell out of another fit dude.

        [–]Akaelda 6 points7 points  (2 children)

        Oddly enough the "Fake it until you make it." advice was passed down to me over the years from my mother. It was the single best piece of advice I'd ever received.

        [–]MightyTaint 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        They are rare but there are some red pill women out there. If you come across an attractive one of dating age, lock that shit down. Your father was a wise man.

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

        Just remember that AWALT applies to so-called "red pill women", too, and don't get your hopes up. I had one until very recently I thought was red pill...until she proved that she wasn't.

        [–]HatredsBlazingGun 6 points7 points  (0 children)

        "Gender roles are necessary for society to function. Failure and/or total rejection of them could lead to a breakdown of society, whether temporary or permanent."

        +1 all day every day.

        [–]foldpak111 18 points19 points  (10 children)

        About bullying. I cringe at all the conventional bully prevention methods because that doesn't work. It just makes the problem worse.

        If I have a kid, he/she will get into boxing/jiu jitsu/mma etc. When he hits puberty, he's gonna get into weight lifting and we're gonna take it to the limits. His lifestyle will send a message to all the schoolkids with parental issues: put your hands on me, you will get dropped. Then daddy will take me to Disneyworld.

        The craziest part is that people will think I'm a child abuser because I won't raise my kid beta. My kid will be an enforcer to say the least.

        [–]forgetful_storytellr 9 points10 points  (0 children)

        Sign the boy up for hockey

        [–]bdub85 4 points5 points  (4 children)

        I remember this kid in middle school that kept harassing me for no clear reason. One day I finally had enough. I was in the same class as him, and I waited until after class to follow him in the halls. I grabbed him and slammed his ass into the lockers and told him not to mess with me again. Needless to say, I never had a issue after that.

        [–]foldpak111 6 points7 points  (3 children)

        Bullies only respond to physical strength. Good work.

        [–]nohangingout 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Just to add to that. I was a small skinny little kid that got picked on a lot. The first time I stood up for myself, and fought back...I still got my ass kicked, but people still fucked with me a lot less after that. Sometimes showing courage instead of cowardice gets you more respect as well.

        [–]drop_it_now 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I find that standing up for yourself verbally only works when it is the first time that they try something. If you blow it the first time or two you just become an easy target no matter how much you try to stand up later.

        [–]Meto1183 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Ain't that the truth. And of course, after you finally fight back, the bully is suddenly the victim. Seriously, its like the rules have a 1 person limit. Either way, definitely worth kicking a kids ass once when I was 13 and having to go to therapy for anger issues for a few months. No bully fucked with me anymore.

        [–]FruitNyer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

        All through elementary school I was bullied. One particular moment though, 4th grade, the bully and I ended up surrounded by the other kids with then pegging us on to fight. I was kinda small back then, though really you could call that average height, but I was also very thin (read: ripped), okay not really but I was a very athletic kid back then! And the bully, kinda like the hulk in comparison, cause he was much taller, probably held back a grade. So I punched him, insta KO, he never bothered me again.

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

        It's the same idea I have in mind for my kids. No one will bully my precious genes :p

        [–]ThisShitRules 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        To quote Ali G "Treat 'em ruff, you get the muff".

        [–]1redpillbanana 6 points7 points  (0 children)

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

        Is there a Redditlog of this post?

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

        No idea how this whole redditlog shit works. If anybody has link for me I'll gladly add it to the OP.

        [–]Endorsed ContributortrpSenator 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Just copy the link from the thread you're talking about and post it in www.redditlog.com

        It will then spit out a carbon copy of the thread to share. This way, people like me who can't find the thread can read it, as well as preventing others from shitting all over the live thread.

        [–]Geleemann 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        "Nothing turns a girl on more than the sight of you beating up another guy." True or not that is... just wicked/evil

        [–][deleted]  (8 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]fastball21 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          Acknowledging the truth is always RP.

          [–]Manuel_S 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Acknowledging the truth IS the original definition of the RP. Here, it's just concentrated towards a defined objective.

          [–]hur1n 8 points9 points  (0 children)

          Often the best way to get a job isn't through working hard, getting a good education, and being tireless - it's having a friend who already works at the company.

          How is this RP...? Cronyism has existed since the dawn of time.

          glass half empty guy (who probably wouldn't get the job): "cronyism".

          glass half full guy (who probably will): "networking".

          [–]turbo_blender 7 points8 points  (2 children)

          How is this RP...? Cronyism has existed since the dawn of time.

          this is RP, it destroys the fantasy that people who work hardest, will end up rich, that the best candidate always wins.

          you may be much more competent than somebody else but the other guy will be hired instead of you because he knows the right people.

          [–]vnjxk 3 points4 points  (1 child)

          Just adding :The guy who works the hardest will be the most successful is true in some cases (for ex. Working out and success with the ladys). Imo, The fact it doesn't work with education so well is because everyone knows that already so it's way less effective

          [–]turbo_blender 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          yes, it applies to situations where somebody else can take the fruits of your work.

          if you work out, someone else can't take your effort for himself and get jacked.

          [–]4ryan42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          So has stoicism and that's also RP. RP isn't something completely new, it's a bundle of different knowledge focused on becoming a better man.

          [–]Diarrhea_Van_Frank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          RP isn't new either. It's always existed, we just recently gave it a name. Also, the term you're looking for is "networking."

          [–]AntixD -1 points0 points  (3 children)

          why not link to thread bro?

          [–][deleted] 32 points33 points  (2 children)

          To not give some site admins some bullshit reason to ban this sub. It's an easy google search away though.

          [–]iSpccn 9 points10 points  (0 children)

          True life.

          Don't need some butthurt mod complaining that a thread got linked to in SRD, where they can then say that we brigaded some shitbag's post.

          [–]Darkone06 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          I think it also serves as a filter, those who want it will seek it and the betas or those who are afraid to seek will just keep moving on down.

          I can expect men to look up shit they dont need to be hold hands and be given a link.