top 200 commentsshow all 241

[–]2alisonstone 139 points140 points  (62 children)

Because she is highly successful, she ends up dealing with other successful business men. Successful businessmen have options. Also, more importantly, successful men are successful because of discipline. They are not going to risk their career and shit where they eat. The people who don't have that discipline usually get weeded out beforehand and never made it up the ladder to the level where they regularly interact with C-level executives.

[–]TheeRyanGrey 152 points153 points  (49 children)

Let me make this very clear: she will end up alone or settling. Ther is no other option for her.

She has elevated her status and like all women, can only date men above her status. The men above her status don't give a fuck about her job or her money or her power. They have all of that already. What they want is what they don't have: something feminine and submissive.

Thats what they don't tell women about equality, they're effectively removin their options.

[–]newlifeasredpill 58 points59 points  (17 children)

I work at a top bank and can tell you that almost every female managing director is either divorced or married to a stay at home dad.

The married ones have zero respect for their pot smoking husbands. They treat them like the employees they order around. No difference.

[–]Cacciaguida 8 points9 points  (9 children)

The married ones have zero respect for their pot smoking husbands. They treat them like the employees they order around. No difference.

why is this? why would they even bother?

[–]reallybloodylongname 22 points23 points  (3 children)

cheap babysitting, trying to keep up with her female friends (look i have a husband too!)

[–]newlifeasredpill 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It is important to have SOMEONE around for "read with your child day class visits", sick days, early dismissals, etc.

School ends at two thirtyish. If mom is a kick ass I banker than her kids need chess and soccer and swim lessons right?

The problem is that when DAD is the one handling all this stuff then MOM has zero attraction to him. Knowing what we know the fuck could she?

[–]bluedrygrass 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not only that. Women simply cannot live alone. They need some emotional tampon, they need to have someone to talk to, mostly they need someone to dump responsibilities on.

[–]newlifeasredpill 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Good Question. Based on what I have seen they meet in college or when she was a rising analyst or VP. At my bank one isn't considered for MD til they have 10 to 15 years in. At this point they have hit the wall (many times they hit it earlier than normal due to stress) and already married and have a kid or two. So she is fucking busy and the nanny costs like 3 to 4 k a month cuz mom works 75 hours a week AND travels so they CONCLUDE that dad isn't going anywhere with his career and is always underemployed so they decide he should be home. Usually with the nanny because of course he is looking for work.

These women end up despising their husbands. I have seen it over and over.

[–]TheeRyanGrey 14 points15 points  (3 children)

People settle and or lie to themselves every day.

Don't believe me? Tell people porn is bad for them.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)


    [–]TheeRyanGrey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Not really. It's people's addiction.

    Men hamster harder than women do.

    [–]newlifeasredpill 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    In this case I think it's not a lie but a very gradual case of the badass mama slowly "falling out of love" with her underachieving husband.

    Remember....she is surrounded by guys who get shit done all day. When she comes home and the husband is actively managing his fantasy football team and not sending out resumes...her pussy dries up.

    [–]cptspiffy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Husbands like that are employees.

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

    They treat them like the employees they order around.

    I've seen this too many times to count. My parents have this exact relationship. Dad works hard and always has but Mom makes more money and wears the pants. She barks orders at him on the daily. They have separate bedrooms and split the bills 50/50 now. Basically just roommates.

    Nobody wants that shit.

    [–]DoctorWelch 21 points22 points  (3 children)

    This is actually a great summation of the problem. As a woman, you can't raise your value too this high a degree or you are effectively forced to abandon your female ideal of what a mate should be.

    Choose one, have a higher value guy or be a higher value woman.

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Can't have cake and eat it too

    That is one of the core lessons of trp

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I wouldn't put it that way. Raising your status and wealth as a woman does not raise her value. Therein lies the problem. A high-value man does not see a high-achieving woman as high-value. But due to the solipsistic nature of women they assume that what they're attracted to is what similarly attracts men.

    A high-value female would be a highly physically attractive woman that few other men have had access to.

    [–]DoctorWelch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I think we are both right. I guess what we should say is that these are two different types of value. She cannot raise her man-value, so to speak, too far or else she effectively becomes a man to those around her.

    Essentially, have a higher value man or be a woman with those same characteristics that make a higher value man.

    [–]DinosaursGoPoop 13 points14 points  (9 children)

    It also depends on what your priorities are as well. I am a red pill parent and a woman like her is exactly what I was looking for and found. I want my children to have the best possible genes they can have. If I marry an intelligent attractive woman with a strong drive than my children likely have a higher genetic base. Biological parents heavily influence their children. I want the best possible genes and chances of success for my children. This form of RP is solely for me wanting to leave my own genetic legacy, nothing more. I have no plans to spend the rest of my life with her and she knows it. We are happily married with children, once the children are gone are premise for marriage is gone as well.

    RP is about improving yourself and how you interact with the world. Understanding the truth behind all the PC bullshit. Genetics is one of those truths that people try to PC away from. "Everyone is Equal" is bullshit at it's core. Marrying to have children requires you to think of the welfare of your future children. Picking a mate that is at the top of the pyramid where you are only makes sense.

    Edit: If anyone complains about dealing with such a strong woman and the problems that will cause I only have one thing to say. Man the fuck up and take control. My wife is smart enough and capable enough to challenge me, she is looking for weakness. I don't show her any and we stay happy. It is a fuck ton of work for sure, it is also worth it since it increases my game and keeps my children in a very strong household.

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 4 points5 points  (2 children)

    Well, no. Your children can learn a strong drive from you, as they should.

    [–]DinosaursGoPoop 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Which they will, if you think genetics from both parents being predisposed for having a strong drive doesn't play a large role then you need to reread all the literature proving that nature plays a larger role than nurture. Why handicap your child genetically by giving them a parent predisposed for being weaker? This makes no sense, it has been proven over and over that genetics play a huge role in who and what people become.

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Because I've met alot if successful men whose mom's were house moms

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    You're conflating intelligence and advancing a career. The two definitely have a correlation, but it's possible to find an intelligent woman that's not married to a career.

    All things being equal, I'd rather have a woman who can raise my children rather than one that goes out hunting for a bigger paycheque.

    [–]DinosaursGoPoop 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    My wife has her masters and does not go after a career, she enjoys being a wife and mother. I also pushed her to that and she is happy. She still works, don't get me wrong. She works though because she wants to, and she works in jobs now because they are fun, not to get a higher salary or anything. You can have a smart, successful, and high quality wife without losing the mother. She will not be a full time stay at home mom most likely but hey that's fine. Who wants a lazy ass woman sitting all day at home? The kids will go to school eventually and then what is she to do? Her accolades and profession will ensure she has a high paying non-blue collar job. Do you want the mother of your children working at McDonalds?

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    You can not have a highly successful career woman that is also a highly successful mom. It's just not possible. Whatever time she takes away from advancing her career is something that her male peers do not have to do. Over time she will fall behind such people.

    Your wife doesn't need to be a stay-at-home mother, but I'd much rather be with a woman who has a job that allows flexibility to deal with children. Flexible hours, time off to deal with sick kids, etc.

    I don't need a business partner, I need a nurturer.

    [–]DinosaursGoPoop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I agree with you here. I do not want a business partner I want a nurturer as well. I also want that bio parent to be the best possible genes for my child. If she as the woman agrees to be a mother than it is my responsibility as the husband to keep her on the right track. To pull her from her from her career path into a lower stress one. To ensure that she can still enjoy her work but have time to be a mother. That she is no longer pushing at the office, instead she is doing something more relaxing so she can be a better mother. That is my job as the husband, to keep the house dynamics the way they need to run.

    Now that doesn't mean being an abusive douche, it does mean taking the time to tell her what I expect from a mother before we get married. That she knows what I want and that she will have to make sacrifices at work to be that mother. I did this with my wife, I laid it out straight up no bullshit. She was happy and more than willing to do it. I held frame as a man, I took charge without stepping on her and shit is great.

    RP is about being the best, so we should be the best. Even if it is hard and requires intense work still fucking do it. It makes you better and pays out in spades. Some agree with me some don't, either way this is how I have lived RP long before I even heard of RP and it works fucking amazing. I agree with RP for the most part. Doesn't mean it still has no room to grow, it does. I am in the decided minority as a RP married father, this is my take on it. Hope it gives some insight and helps others.

    [–]bluedrygrass 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    See, you're doing a basic mistake here. You're searching masculine traits in a female.

    Try reversing your reasoning. A woman wants her female daughters to be cute and feminine like her, and hopefully more. Using your reasoning... she ends up marrying a feminine man.

    It does not work that way.

    [–]MomoUnchained 16 points17 points  (13 children)

    She has elevated her status and like all women, can only date men above her status. The men above her status don't give a fuck about her job or her money or her power.

    DING DING DING. We have a winner!

    Men in general, don't care about a woman's accomplishments as far as money and power go. I could give a shit if a girl I banged was a CEO or worked at Taco Bell as long as she was hot, sucked me, fucked me, and shut her fuckin mouth.

    I don't really care about a woman's status, education level, or earning power unless it will negatively affect my own. I'm just looking for something hot to fuck.

    [–]copralalic 11 points12 points  (10 children)

    I disagree. Given two equal women, if one of them is a physician, I'll go for the physician. That's how I think, maybe I'm in the minority.

    Then again, the one that's the physician is less likely to be willing to be the woman I want her to be due to the fact that she perceives her SMV as higher, so the one that is not a physician (the nurse, PT, dietician, etc) is more likely to act like and be the woman I would actually want.

    So, if the two choices were exactly identical, I would take the more accomplished one as a tie-breaker, but that is unlikely to ever freakin' happen.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Dating a doctor is tough. I dated a surgeon for a couple months - girl was always busy, and always stressed out.

    [–]bluedrygrass 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    By marrying an high status, successful woman you're marrying a woman lees inclined to be a caring affectionate and nurturing companion to you and your childrens.

    Wants succesful, alpha traits in a woman for your offspring? Take a look at the female penitentiary. And you'll end up with your "woman" throwing your childrens out the window, raging at you, and perpetually unsatisfied and wanting for more.

    The most successful mothers aren't the scientists nerds, are the most feminine and caring ones.

    [–]PeteMullersKeyboard 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    No, I agree. I don't enjoy the company of unintelligent people, this idea that women are just fuckboxes is childish and short-sighted. I don't waste my time with people that are boring or stupid. Women included.

    [–]bluedrygrass 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    But you're doing the mistake of dividing women in two categories, scientists and stupid. Those two extremes are both wrong choices, but i'd argue the scientists one is the worst. Those females are females only on the outside (if even), inside they are a worst mess than the standard female is.

    [–]PeteMullersKeyboard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I don't know about that, you think that the average, vapid, "basic white girl" is a superior person to spend time around? Boring people annoy me to no end, so I guess maybe I'm biased. Most of my friends have pretty extreme personalities, and so have all the woman I've ever been involved with. It makes for a less boring, more volatile life, which I can understand isn't for everyone.

    [–]MomoUnchained 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I disagree. Given two equal women, if one of them is a physician, I'll go for the physician.

    Well no shit? We aren't in disagreement then. When did I ever say if all other things were equal that I would take the lower status woman?

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Compared to what though? A physician vs. a lawyer might be an easy pick, but what about a school teacher? Honestly, I'd rather have the teacher. A physician would hardly be home.

    [–]Matsew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    except if they are ever gonna be 'high status', they are going to have to adopt a masculine mindset. more stress, more testosterone, no fucks given about feelings, get it done. the ones that make it will both look less feminine and act controlling as fuck which are two things you don't ever want in a woman.

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

    I could give a shit if a girl I banged was a CEO or worked at Taco Bell as long as she was hot, sucked me, fucked me, and shut her fuckin mouth.

    Right, and the CEO is never going to be that girl. She's wealthy and powerful and isn't going to submit to men like that.

    That may well be another reason dating life is difficult for her.

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    Well, again, no.

    Both responses I've gotten are extreme.

    You want a woman who is nurturing, affectionate, and mothering so as to be a good standard and moral provider for your children.

    But the only guys who care about a woman's power and money aren't the kinda men these women want.

    [–]Mymobileacoconut 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    she will end up alone or settling

    I have seen a few Mamma's boy (vs Daddy's girl) relationships, with powerful women and submissive guys. Some women are into it, but it doesn't look like this one is...

    [–]TheeRyanGrey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    There is an exception to every th ing

    [–]balancespec2 21 points22 points  (0 children)

    This. I don't flirt with attractive people at work. .. coworker or superior or subordinate

    [–]Endorsed ContributorAerobus 17 points18 points  (5 children)

    Successful businessmen have options.

    This is too difficult for her hamster to understand.

    [–]copralalic 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Yes and no. Her hamster understands it perfectly, but doesn't actually believe it. I mean, her hamster would let her give advice to other women, but never let her apply that advice to herself, because she's someone special, after all.

    [–]Overkillengine 7 points8 points  (3 children)

    A stunning number of women believe they are an exception to what should be common sense.

    A former acquaintance of mine took up with a man that had yet to be faithful to any other woman he had been with, and for someone demented reason thought she would be different despite my warnings.

    She is now a 30 year old single mom.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorAerobus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Special snowflake syndrome in action.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)


      [–]Overkillengine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Oh I am aware. I even told her I knew that it was a waste of my breath warning her as I knew she would ignore it like a thirsty dog goes for antifreeze.

      [–]CanadianMastermind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Regardless of gender, it's a pretty bad idea to try to find romance at the workplace. It works out in rare cases, but more often than not it will result in drama. If she were a male CEO, it still wouldn't be a good idea to try to sleep around with coworkers. Even if they did show interest.

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

      At a 7-person company, everyone is 'interacting with the C-level executives.'. Hell, everyone at a 7-person company sometimes IS a C-level executive. Tiny companies resemble circle jerks where everyoen gets off on having a fancy title. If you're the only HR person, congrats you are CHRO or at least SVP of HR. The Wikipedia article on C-suite has like 30 entries.

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

      I don't think she is talking about dating her own employees, or at least I hope she is smart enough not to do that because that is just looking for trouble. She's probably talking about dating people she meets at industry events, which would likely mean venture capitalists, investors, potential customers, and executives of other companies. The socially awkward nerdy programmer is generally not invited to these events because they don't add value, they just risk making the company look bad. Everybody at these events are socially savvy, so they know not to risk their own career or reputation to try to get a date.

      [–]sticktothehardstuff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Because she is highly successful, she ends up dealing with other successful business men.

      Ehh. It's highly unlikely that she is successful, let alone, very successful. That's the narrative she's selling, but she doesn't even sell it well. Also highly doubt that she ends up dealing with other successful business men.

      Successful businessmen have options. Also, more importantly, successful men are successful because of discipline. They are not going to risk their career and shit where they eat.

      Ehh, again. Let's get real.

      The people who don't have that discipline usually get weeded out beforehand and never made it up the ladder to the level where they regularly interact with C-level executives.

      Some of this is true.

      [–]1User-31f64a4e 0 points1 point  (0 children)


      And she probably has a lot of determination, discipline and power. Not all that feminine, really.

      [–]17 Endorsed ContributorHumanSockPuppet[S] 138 points139 points  (29 children)

      What I find most interesting about this post is that she feels like a failure precisely because men won't hit on her.

      She senses that "female success" is measured by male desire, and that if men won't pursue her then she has somehow "failed as a female."

      It's compelling evidence for the argument that gender differences are as much a matter of firmware (that is, our instincts) as they are a difference in our hardware (our physical configurations).

      [–]13409852034 52 points53 points  (15 children)

      Interesting. I saw the post from a different slant. I didn't necessarily get the "she feels like a failure" vibe, but I suppose it's possible. Instead, to me she seemed just bewildered and craving attention.

      To me, it seemed like a theme was that she felt that she considered herself attractive because of her successes: CEO, entrepreneur. The main thrust of her post was wondering why that didn't convey attraction from the men around her.

      It's understandable. Consider if the genders and roles were reversed: if she was a successful mid-20s male CEO entrepreneur. She's a younger woman working for this man. I'd hazard a guess that she (and perhaps many other women) would find that kind of guy attractive. They would likely even consider dating that kind of man within the workplace, even if risks were involved.

      She's seeing the world through this perspective, and expects the men around her to also to adopt that perspective, too. It's not happening (for the reasons OP pointed out, as have others) - and she can't grasp why it isn't happening. I get the sense she feels a bit lost. Of course, most guys here know why. Many guys don't care about how much cash a woman makes, or what their status is. Guys have other priorities. She doesn't get that.

      [–][deleted] 41 points42 points  (3 children)

      Exactly! She is so much of everything that she wants in a man that she expects men to be attracted to her, because she would be attracted to a male version of her!

      This woman is the mirror image of a man who was sensitive to a woman's feelings, who was considerate of her every need, who offered to cook her breakfast and let himself be used for her pleasure with no consideration of his own ... and then who wondered why no woman wanted to fuck him.

      [–]87GNX 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      Fucking solipsism, how does it work?

      [–]superthankzforasking 30 points31 points  (8 children)

      Original poster chiming in - it's been interesting reading everyone's views. Some are very polarised, some are very on point.

      I don't fee like a failure as a woman, but going out to "social events" and having the men in our social group start out interested and flirty, but then pull back to just business after they get the scoop has been bewildering.

      Yes. I am human. I am a female, and flirting/dating/relationship/husband are all things I want in my life. I've thrown myself into a unique position in life, and I'm reaching out to try to understand it better.

      The feedback I've had has been really interesting, from the on point to the unsavoury, so thank you.

      [–]LewisSkolnick 9 points10 points  (1 child)

      You are in a unique position. The guys you mention probably think that if they hook up with you, it won't be worth it because it puts their career in jeopardy. And anything more then that - marriage for instance - they have probably ruled out too because you make more money / have more power then they do.

      Your target market is high-end but very small in number... as in a guy who makes as equal / more than you, is a stud etc.

      Whatever you end up doing - just make certain you don't settle for some beta dope. Don't do the ever popular "lean-in" technique and marry some pudgy doofus who has no spine.

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

      The fact that you have an open mind and are willing to entertain 'controversial' viewpoints means that you'll be able to fix your situation. TRP is known for having some vitriol, but if you can get past that, there is a lot to take away from this thread. Really understand your position so you can fix it.

      [–]RandomAnecdote 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      I think you ought to watch the movie "Coming to America," starring Eddie Murphy. It's about a wealthy African prince who takes a minimum wage job in order to find the love of his life. He had to conceal his wealth in order to find truth and honesty in his girl. Notice how the sister behaved when she learned who he really was.

      The other thing you might consider is ballroom dancing. On the floor, no one really knows or cares who you are during your day job. What matters is finding a connection. Out in the dancing world, you can become what you want people to see, and limit what you reveal. That's assuming that your business world doesn't intersect with your dance friends.

      Barring that, you're going to have to pursue men who are more successful than you, other CEOs, people within a higher income range. Alpha males who aren't intimidated by you or directly rely upon you for their income might be hard to come by. If you're as successful as implied, a beta won't be able to rescue or provide for you.

      I think ballroom is the way to go to increase your circle. There will be guys who are all about dancing and guys who are using it as a means for hookup. That said, men who spend the time to become disciplined at dance are going to be more attractive. Also, dancing can replace the gym or whatever workout you're doing now.

      [–]bluedrygrass 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      It won't work anyway, not for long. She behaves different due to her position and her traits that lead her there. So she won't be a good wife/gf.

      This if she finds someone, higher or lower than her, than is willing to take her. Wich is not a given, because females like her are typically a pain in the ass and ultimately unreliable for long relationships.

      [–]the99percent1 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      She could easily settle for someone less. But that's not going to happen.. Women rarely date down.

      Men date non-discriminately and don't have a long list of unrealistic expectations on potential partners.

      She is suffering from a classic case of having too few options. But her limitations are self imposed. So I find it bewildering that she's finding fault in the world, when instead, she should be looking at herself.

      And that opens up another can of jars. Women don't like to judge themselves or hear the truth. She's going to be alone for the rest of her life.

      [–]Here2lrn 92 points93 points  (9 children)

      What I find most interesting about this post is that she feels like a failure precisely because men won't hit on her.

      More like because desirable men at business fundraisers won't hit on her. Bet if a factory worker wandered over and tried it on in his high vis she'd think he was a creep.

      [–]17 Endorsed ContributorHumanSockPuppet[S] 56 points57 points  (8 children)

      More like because desirable men at business fundraisers won't hit on her. Bet if a factory worker wandered over and tried it on in his high vis she'd think he was a creep.

      Wealth is not a guarantee of status. Only dominant, Machiavellian behaviour is.

      But we believe wealth to be a signifier of status when we see it because wealth often follows from dominant Machiavellian behaviour.

      This woman would likely fall head-over heels for a dark triad surfer bum she met during a Hawaii business trip. Without need or interest in her money-making ability, he would be free to flirt and court her the way her instincts demand.

      [–]incraved 12 points13 points  (1 child)

      We all want someone to share our lives with, innit?

      She is feeling bad because men don't want her. It's completely normal, not because she is a woman specifically, but because she is a human.

      [–]copralalic 7 points8 points  (0 children)

      The tragedy is that she seems to have no insight as to why.

      [–]furythree 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      What I find is the biggest problem about hose wanting equality is that just because it makes sense socially. It doesn't work that way psychologically that's engrained into our natural instincts. Her example is the perfect scenario where she's achieved equality but she doesn't get to double dip because you can't have it both ways

      [–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

      NEVER shit where you eat. These guys are smart not to go near her.

      [–]MomoUnchained 37 points38 points  (4 children)

      This goes back to the King and Queen analogy presented by Patrice O'Neal.

      A woman cannot raise a man's status through her accomplishments, power, money, or status. If my wife cures cancer or closes a huge real estate deal, that doesn't make ME more of a badass. A woman's value to a man is in her physical beauty and her youth. Simple as that. Having a girlfriend that is hot as fuck would do more for my status with both men and women than having a girlfriend who is average looking but wealthy. Nobody gives a fuck if I'm a "doctor's husband".

      A man cannot become a king by marrying a queen. He would simply be the queen's husband.

      A woman on the other hand, does get her status from her partner's status. Women are 100% satisfied marrying a banker, doctor, or lawyer because that would make them a banker's/doctor's/lawyers WIFE. That would elevate their status in society.

      When a woman marries a high status male, she shares his status. When a woman marries a king, she becomes a queen. A queen is the highest possible status a woman can ever attain. Who is the queen? The King's bitch. The highest possible position a woman could ever hope to attain is to be THE WOMAN of the most powerful man. A man can make himself a king, but a woman needs a man to become a queen.

      [–]1exit_sandman 6 points7 points  (3 children)

      Case in point: try to name the husbands of Margret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, Indira Gandhi or whomever (if you are at least somewhat familiar with the country in question). Hillary Clinton doesn't count.

      And now try to name the wives/partners of powerful male politicians who aren't powerful politicans themselves.

      [–]1 Endorsed Contributorvandaalen 5 points6 points  (2 children)

      Hillary Clinton doesn't count.

      She's a pretty good example though. Does she raise Bill's value in any way?

      [–]DoesNotMatterAnymore 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      Well, one is a 2 times President of the USA, the other is Bill Clinton's wife. My point is, Bill will stay Mr. President for the rest of his life, and i don't think that Hillary will affect his value in any way. If she... and that a big IF.

      [–]19 Endorsed Contributordrrrrrr 46 points47 points  (10 children)

      It's great, because she's living the dream of these reddit post-college losers who have a useless degree and can't get taken seriously (because they have no skills). To be a CEO of a startup and live the "entrepreneur" life and have all these people believe in your potential.

      And all she wants is to be objectified and fucked right. That's the beautiful thing about women, they can be as high value as they want, but at the end of the day, they long to look up. Without a superior masculine presence to provide direction and guidance, most women are lost and miserable. To be successful in the masculine sense of achievement, one must be independent and an island, and be happy being that way. Women simply aren't wired to get to that level. Virtually all of the hardcore career women I know are miserable and on anti-depressants, and very bitter about dating and life in general.

      As David Deida says, for men your #1 priority has to be your mission in life. But for 99% of women who try to live that way, they will be miserable.

      [–]WindowToAlaska 2 points3 points  (2 children)

      Any good ways to obtain those skills?

      [–]copralalic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Step one is having a vision. Step two is having a mentor.

      Step zero is having some huge, brass swingers, because you are going to be tested, and you are going to fail... but that's where the vision comes in.

      [–]Soultrane9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I suggest physical and mental discipline. Your day should be the following for months, even years based on your current level:

      Get up early in the morning. Eat, go to work. Arrive home, no sitting down, you get your gym bag and head to the gym. After that you prepare your next day meal and in the remaining time (it should be 10pm at this point) you either read, work or just rest with your thoughts.

      Shit's called Monk mode. It's hard, it's boring and you will feel alone. But that's the way.

      [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      That's the beautiful thing about women, they can be as high value as they want, but at the end of the day, they long to look up

      I work with lawyers, you couldn't be more right. So many of the new associates could easily chase their fellow associates, but no, they have eyes only for the senior partners. Their same age associates are on the same level, so not good enough.

      You would be amazed at the number of divorced lawyers. The ones that are still in marriages typically have pretty shit lives at home. I recall one screaming her head off into her phone at her emasculated chump of a husband. And that was in front of me, I could only imagine what she says when no one else is around.

      [–]gameno 31 points32 points  (6 children)

      I watched a video posted a few hours ago that ties in to this idea. The guy points out that women are in a "Renaissance" and are getting more and more of what they want, including higher education and better pay, yet they are stuck in an older mindset of looking for men that are going to provide for them and protect them.

      Women want to have their cake and eat it too. And there is no reasoning with them because their mentality is always "we have less" or "we are weaker" so "we deserve more."

      [–]balancespec2 13 points14 points  (5 children)

      So they're like a racial minority in the us

      [–]kinkydiver 33 points34 points  (2 children)

      They are exactly like a racial minority. In my company they get their own events (breakfast with the CEO, lectures from businesswomen, speed networking, etc.) the same way that minorities do. I see those events about every month, but in 10+ years in my firm I have yet to spot anything offered towards non- hispanic white men. Because that would be racist and sexist at the same time.

      [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      [–]smith5ar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Sins of our Fathers. That would be racist/sexist because non Hispanic white men have been the majority, and past generations had (actively or passively) kept out women and minorities. Companies/society let these events happen to make up for that exclusion to an extent

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

      It's a common mentality in a west. "Group X had been victimized in the past by group Y, therefore members of group X have a moral edge (because victims can never be bad, and if they are, circumstances are to blame) and also deserve reparations by group Y for past victimization.

      [–]el_chief 10 points11 points  (1 child)

      "I ate the cake, but then there wasn't any left!"

      [–]ilirm 11 points12 points  (2 children)

      What really bothers me about her attitude is she can't seem to separate her personal life from her professional life. Can you image how insanely stupid it would be to complicate a successful business by fucking your subordinates? I don't think she sees that there is a whole wide world of cock available to her outside of her business. She cant seem to separate her feelings from her business decisions, and I see some serious problems in her future if she continues to seek male attention at work.

      [–]DoesNotMatterAnymore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      What really bothers me about her attitude is she can't seem to separate her personal life from her professional life.

      Few months ago there was a blog post about a 60something woman, and her 50something lover. He told her, to dress up sexy, otherwise she will not pass the boner test. The guy said, that he really enjoys her company (personal value) but if she wanted to be fucked, she have to cover up for body, because, well, she is not hot anymore (sexual value).

      She was freaking out, about how rude her lover was with her. She was unable (at the age of 60+) separate her personal value from her dried up sexual value.

      [–]bluedrygrass 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Women's brain really is in the pussy. If you're remotely attractive and alpha, expect to be hit on by half your female coworkers, that will all be already in a relationship. You would just want to scream them, "Can you realize how immensely stupid and suicidal this is? you're gonna lose your work and your male".

      Men are less stupid under that aspect, they can control themself more, even if of course there are always a lot of dumbasses that cannot control their balls.

      [–]∞ Red Pill VisionaryRollo-Tomassi 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      Perhaps she should consider that the guys she says are hitting on her initially, pull back because they don't want to risk a harassment suit from the woman who employs them.

      They aren't intimidated by her aggrandized sense of 'empowerment', she's simply not worth the risk when there are more feminine, easy-going and more sexually available women to be had that don't present a career damaging risk.

      [–]ShekelBanker 27 points28 points  (0 children)

      The backfire of the "strong, independent woman" mentality is beautiful; it was inevitable.

      [–]bat_mayn 16 points17 points  (2 children)

      Women basically want to go back 60 years in time, and have their own version of Mad Men.

      They don't understand, that's never going to happen again, because of their pursuit to neuter and subvert the workplace they will have to mire themselves in the sterile misery as well.

      Made your bed, now lie in it.

      [–]neveragoodtime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Another victim of her own victimhood. She can thank all the strong independent women who came before her that milked the system in sexual harassment claims. Surprise surprise, dudes now avoid work place romance. This will probably follow on college campuses, until the only girls who can get laid are the ones who pay money for it.

      [–]Hoodwink 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I don't know. The offices I've seen - there's a lot of sex going around. But, these were offices for an engineering firm with sweet government contracts that were not going to get away. (None of the engineers/IT were involved in the sex - it was purely executives/management/sales.)

      Never worked for a start-up or entrepreneur, so it might be different.

      [–]4_YRT 26 points27 points  (7 children)

      Why doesn't she date guys outside of her profession? She could probably go to a college campus and snag some adjunct history professor who doesn't mind being the bitch in a relationship.

      [–]balancespec2 31 points32 points  (4 children)

      Because the man has to be equal or superior for her to be attracted to him. Men typically want someone equal or inferior.

      [–]Endorsed ContributorAerobus 19 points20 points  (0 children)

      Why doesn't she date guys outside of her profession?

      Because she is a slave to her hypergamy. She will be unhappy if she dates someone beneath her, and she even knows this.

      [–]1iluminatiNYC 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Excellent point. Or she could find someone with a high-presitge but relatively low paying job. Remember, that's how the Clintons made it work all the way to the White House. Yeah, Bill cheated, but he still got himself elected.

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

      Or, she can exert political power and have the government protect and provide for her by having men sweat and bleed for the government, while being a strong, independent womyn.

      [–]Seuguh 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      Her and that catcalling woman would have a lot to say to each other.

      [–]OsoFeo 51 points52 points  (20 children)

      This post is perfect.

      I do not agree with the TRP convention that women are constitutionally less intelligent than men. I've met too many examples in my life of competent, intelligent women. But you can't occupy male social positions without sacrificing the benefits that you would accrue by capitalizing on your femininity.

      This sums it all up:

      Congratulations, you are now equal.

      You can either be: (1) Strong, independent, respected and forever unloved or (2) Protected, provided-for, and subservient to the man who sweats and bleeds for you.

      [–]17 Endorsed ContributorHumanSockPuppet[S] 82 points83 points  (18 children)

      I do not agree with the TRP convention that women are constitutionally less intelligent than men.

      I wouldn't say that that particular idea is an TRP convention. Rather, it's an exaggeration by men who are blissfully ecstatic about having a haven where they can vent a life of frustration. It's cathartic to have a free space in which to mock women when all your life they've been treated like an endangered species.

      It just seems like a convention because there are so many "newly awakened" men arriving here every day, and their collective catharsis drowns out the reasoned and seasoned veterans.

      It's more accurate to say that men have a greater tendency towards the extremes. There are more exceptionally stupid men than there are exceptionally stupid women. Likewise, there are more exceptionally smart men than there are exceptionally smart women. But with all other factors being the same, a man and woman of similar IQ (or whatever metric you deem appropriate) will perform at roughly the same capacity.

      [–]Revo_Luzione 6 points7 points  (2 children)

      It's not just about IQ. Males and females of a similar IQ will show disportionate income. It's not always better for men, but when it's better, it's a lot better--men take more risks and when risks pay off, they are rewarded. Like with IQ in general, men's income at a given IQ is more widely varied. Women aren't risk takers.

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

      It's not about risks. Between two similar skilled and literate male and female, the male is the better worker.

      Why? More reliable, less bitching, less talking, less sensitive to hipotethical offences, stronger, less dependant on someone's help, and tons more.

      I've had various work experiences, and women are the worst coworkers, always.

      Things like feeling offended if you didn't notice her new haircut and stay grumpy for six hours.

      things like being elusive in giving answers about work questions.

      Things like feeling entitled of being an asshole, lazy and bitchy in those days of the month. This is a costant of even the apparently better, quieter females.

      Is she particularly absent, grumpy, elusive, unreachable? Oh no, it's that time again, the time in wich they feel like the world owes them something and nobody can understand how bad they feel on period, oh poor me, etc.,etc.

      An heavy box has just arrived in the office? They don't even look it, you're the man, it's your duty to do the physical tasks, always! The worst part is that if there's the apparently alpha but really just a shameless whiteknight boss around, he won't tell the nearest female to pick up that (10 lbs) box.

      No, he'll look around for the privileged male. But, hey, we all do the same things and are all paid equal!

      [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      To be fair, men evolved to work in hierarchies precisely for the benefit of optimizing success. Our genetics literally lend themselves towards being successful in pursuing a goal.

      Women historically did not evolve this way, so most start with a handicap. It's analogous to someone learning a new language versus a native speaker.

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

      But with all other factors being the same, a man and woman of similar IQ (or whatever metric you deem appropriate) will perform at roughly the same capacity.

      Do you think that holds on tasks that involve mechanical reasoning?

      [–]OsoFeo 11 points12 points  (13 children)

      The idea is not monolithic, but it is advanced by the TRP luminaries who say that women are "the most responsible teenager in the house". I understand what they're saying about relative accountability within the family structure and larger society, but its corrupt interpretation becomes "women are less intelligent than men".

      I'm not trying to create a divisive argument here, just point out that this post is a perfect example of the fundamental issue that TRP studies: our gendered social roles (driven largely by biology but with a wide enough degree of variation to lack anything close to absolute determinism) are mutually exclusive.

      I'm a gay guy with probably 50/50 split in my cognitive orientation. But here's the thing, on any day I function with my "male" brain I find it very hard to use my "female" brain, and vice-versa. The two modes of cognition are entirely mutually exclusive.

      [–]17 Endorsed ContributorHumanSockPuppet[S] 31 points32 points  (6 children)

      I understand what they're saying about relative accountability within the family structure and larger society, but its corrupt interpretation becomes "women are less intelligent than men".

      One unfortunate consequence of being human is that we are want to reduce information so that it is easier to store and recall when we need it.

      Consider these two sentences:

      1. The king died and the queen died.

      2. The king died, and then the queen died of grief.

      Both sentences contain the same fundamental information. But the second sentence is much easier to store and recall because it reduces the dimensions of the context through the use of a narrative.

      This is why you frequently see people drawing fatuous conclusions between aphorisms and concluding that "women are the most responsible teenagers in the house" somehow means "all women are idiots." It's narrative fallacy, yes, but it also makes the message digestible to people without the time or inclination to engage in deep reflection on the messages of the Red Pill.

      We are creatures evolved to seek causality for the sake of survival. Being a school of thought, TRP cannot interpret anything. Only individuals can do that.

      I'm not trying to create a divisive argument here

      No, certainly not. I think this kind of discussion is precisely what we need here. Thank you for your thoughtful responses.

      I'm a gay guy with probably 50/50 split in my cognitive orientation. But here's the thing, on any day I function with my "male" brain I find it very hard to use my "female" brain, and vice-versa. The two modes of cognition are entirely mutually exclusive.

      I think this would make an excellent RP AMA, if you are willing.

      [–]OsoFeo 16 points17 points  (4 children)

      I would be, if enough other RP subscribers endorsed the idea. I try to avoid being the attention-seeking guy who screams "LOOK AT ME I'M A GAY GUY IN TRP".

      [–]massthetics 5 points6 points  (1 child)

      Would love to see an AMA on this.

      [–]Diabolo_Advocato 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      There is a whole sub dedicated to gay men accepting TRP.

      I believe it is /r/altTRP

      [–]alphbux 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I think your observations on this would be fascinating.

      AMA please!

      [–]elevul 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Would definitely be a very interesting AMA.

      But regarding the "women are the most responsible teenagers in the house", I interpret it as more of a lack of rational choice on their part, rather than lack of capability of rational thought.

      But if you put them in the right situation, same as a man, they turn out to be very capable, same as a teenager. It's the motivation that's missing.

      [–]VoyPerdiendo1 2 points3 points  (2 children)

      I'm a gay guy with probably 50/50 split in my cognitive orientation. But here's the thing, on any day I function with my "male" brain I find it very hard to use my "female" brain, and vice-versa. The two modes of thinking are entirely mutually exclusive.

      I find this extremely interesting.

      [–]OsoFeo 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      Thanks. It's interesting to observe from inside after having studied MR/TRP for several years.

      I tend to keep the female-brain at home and expose it only to my partner (who has his own cognitive dichotomy, but it's distributed very differently because his work is less masculinely oriented than my STEM job). My partner has mentioned that I become noticeably colder to him when I'm in work-mode, so much so that from the way I answer the phone he can tell how deeply engaged I am in my work (or debating on Reddit). "Hi." "Oh, you're working. I'll call you back later."

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

      I find this extremely unbacked by serious studies.

      [–]Adach 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      I do not agree with the TRP convention that women are constitutionally less intelligent than men.

      I know there are threads that bash on women but TRP isn't about who is better or smarter, its about understanding the differences.

      [–]SteelChicken 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Congratulations, you are now equal.

      Yep. Thats it in a nutshell.

      [–]the99percent1 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      This absolutely shits me laughing..

      Men have no problem settling for a girl who are less successful in work life.

      Successful women rarely ever do. So they are conflicted.. They think men of similar calibre would be attracted to them.

      Conflicted, successful women are conflicted.

      [–]RedPillMatic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Great post. Women claim they want equality until it smacks them in the face.

      [–]regularbowls 4 points5 points  (17 children)

      I think this is a pretty good problem to have for a woman. She just needs to find someone more successful than her. To these men, knowing her professionally is worth more than knowing her romantically, so it appears to me she's hanging around some urchins.

      [–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (8 children)

      She just needs to find someone more successful than her.

      These dudes aren't hitting on her because they don't want to fuck up their careers. So, if she wants someone more successful, she needs to find someone who is enormously more successful than her, to the point that they aren't a colleague. Good luck on that one.

      [–]regularbowls 4 points5 points  (7 children)

      why is that so difficult? if I read correctly, she's from San Francisco. there are plenty of other "CEOs" there as well as other successful people in general. she also seems to be hanging around colleagues in her industry so of course she's going to encounter brown nosers. she isn't taking advantage of online dating either. honestly, I think she just wants to complain about being "too successful" for guys around her to boost her ego. or maybe that's insensitive.

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

      Sure, she's hanging around colleagues. That's because she's devoting her life overwhelmingly to her job. As for online dating, my guess is that men who are more successful than her have better options than going online.

      honestly, I think she just wants to complain about being "too successful" for guys around her to boost her ego.

      Eh, this doesn't seem like bragplaining to me. Usually those kind of things are women complaining about womanly attributes bringing them too much male attention. In this case she's coming pretty close to saying she's dateless because she's unfeminine. Note that she's not hostile towards these dudes that are all business with her, just puzzled.

      [–]regularbowls 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      unfeminine. that's a good point. a minute ago I was thinking that she could simply try to hit on guys herself. she mentioned how one guy was hitting on her but then stopped when he figured out who he was. but that's the point, HE was hitting on HER. and that's what she wants. to be pursued, but she can't have that because she feels she's put herself in a dominant position. funny how that works. she actually seems like an interesting person to date to be honest.

      [–]2alisonstone 1 point2 points  (4 children)

      She'll likely have to look at other industries. CEOs don't want to fuck CEOs of other companies in the same industry because their paths may cross in the future and it would create conflicts of interest. CEOs have responsibilities to the other stakeholders and employees.

      Imagine a deal is struck between two companies. One company always gets the better side of the deal, often by chance and not because he/she was the better negotiator or was better informed. Think about the backlash and lawsuits if people discovered that the CEOs have been fucking each other. People would think that sex and personal favors played a role in the negotiations, and someone is going to lose control of his/her company.

      [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 2 points3 points  (7 children)

      She just needs to find someone more successful than her.

      There's a problem with that, in that a person more successful than her has options. He could easily choose a younger, hotter woman. Her career does nothing to attract a more attractive man; what use does he have for more income?

      Women simply don't understand this, due to their solipsism.

      [–]regularbowls 0 points1 point  (6 children)

      first, you know nothing of her attractiveness. second, I actually find her success attractive. you are basing your conclusions on unfounded assumptions.

      [–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 0 points1 point  (5 children)

      first, you know nothing of her attractiveness

      You don't seem to understand my point. Her physical attractiveness is what will draw a more successful man, not her own success.

      Most men, particularly men who have achieved some degree of success, pursue hot young women rather than simply successful women. They'll still pursue a successful woman so long as she is physically attractive.

      Be honest, would you rather be with an ugly, successful woman, or a beautiful but poor woman, all else being equal?

      [–]copralalic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      I read it as brag-plaining. Very hamsterish of her.

      [–]Ktigers 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      "People want to work for her"

      Well in that case, no shit noone wants to date her.

      Business and personal relationships should never be interwined

      [–]ExpendableOne 10 points11 points  (5 children)

      You can either be: Strong, independent, respected and forever unloved or Protected, provided-for, and subservient to the man who sweats and bleeds for you.

      Not really. She's a woman(who claims to be attractive), she pretty much can have it both ways. She's financially strong and independent but there is nothing stopping her from romantically pursuing those men either. If those men appear to be sexually/romantically uninterested in her to try to keep things professional and profitable, then not only can she just fix that by approaching those men romantically/sexually(or, maybe just even mentioning being interested) but she is in a position of power. She can dictate the rules. Instead, she just complains that men aren't doing all the work for her, the way she feels entitled to for being a woman.

      And, really, even if she didn't want those guys, there's certainly plenty of loving, supportive and passionate men out there who would actually love her for who she is, rather than how much money she makes. The problem here is that she would look at those men and view them as being lower than dirt, because they aren't "alpha" males. Like many successful women, she is using her financial success to justify an entitlement to a richer "alpha" to make her feel like a "real woman"(weak, dependent, unrespected and submissive) while maintaining the lifestyle she's grown accustomed to.

      [–]Overzealous_BlackGuy 11 points12 points  (0 children)

      No woman wants to be the one to approach men, the fact that she isnt approached is her problem she feels less valuable, by the lack of approach that is whats being said

      [–]Matsew 3 points4 points  (3 children)

      you don't pursue men as a woman unless you want to be pumped and dumped lmao

      [–]TheLiftedGuru 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      "Women only have the model of success & power that men have established. So when they try to operate within that, they are acting like men which means, they are denying their 'Queeness', and will never be happy." - Marc Maron paraphrasing the late, great Patrice O'Neal.

      [–]poindeckster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Missing out on something fundemental in her life, and its making her doubt herself to her ver y core

      Sounds like an issue many people face in life with any amount of power

      [–]PM_ME_BOOTYSHOTS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Of course they pull guys aside and tell them you're off limits, you're the cash cow. The golden goose.

      What happens if you get knocked up? You're out for months, possibly longer. That's their livelihood you're fucking with.

      [–]Glenbert 21 points22 points  (22 children)

      Another millennial "CEO." They build some shitty app invite their friends over and suddenly they think they're Jack fucking Welch.

      Fuck these children.

      [–]TimeHo 17 points18 points  (0 children)

      If i had a cushy job at I sure as hell wouldn't want to stick my dick in pandora's box. These dudes are just being pragmatic.

      [–]RP_Student 31 points32 points  (7 children)

      Dude, you have no idea how successful they are. I know of companies that size which work out of apartments pulling in $1MM+ in revenue a month.

      [–]Glenbert 14 points15 points  (6 children)

      Yeah, I've consulted a lot of "companies" like that. The reason they don't have proper offices is usually because they're hemorrhaging cash and no one in their right mind would lease to them.

      Sure I don't know for sure, but after looking into the "books" of 7 different companies with millennial "CEOs" this year, I'm pretty confident in my guess.

      "But we made $400,000 last month! What does COCA have to do with anything?"

      [–]Kingoffistycuffs 1 point2 points  (5 children)

      I don't suppose you'd be willing to elaborate? What is a coca?

      [–]stolidfact 12 points13 points  (2 children)

      Cost of customer acquisition. I would say this is #1 reason of startup failure today. Think of it in terms of lifetime monetization of a customer based on your product/service offering. It costs a certain amount of money to acquire a customer. And a customer will pay out a certain amount of revenue over time. What most new startups do is say cool, we are going to be an app or be online/cloud. So how to get customers? I know! ads! google, etc. So they spend $200+ to get a customer because the conversion rate for those expensive ads is rather atrocious. But then that customer will either never even get to the breakeven point because there's no way that lifetime monetization will be $200, or the breakeven is 2+ years away (eg $10/month subscription revenue).

      Lack of focus on the core basics of finance. Questions like... so what is your breakeven here? Does your cash flow support it? And how does this tie in to NPV? Structural business issues are tough to solve, and many startups fail because of them.

      [–]rztzz 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      While this is true, it also underlines the extreme difficulty of starting and growing a successful business. It is why society gives social value to people who "start their own companies" but doesn't give social value to some random accountant. Nobody wants to interview an accountant. For this reason, I don't understand the hate for startup culture. If the entire country was accountants engineers and bankers the economy would go to crap.

      [–]stolidfact 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Absolutely. That's where the creativity and art of business comes in. No reward without risk. Sometimes, situations warrant taking a greater risk, and sometimes a lesser risk. In the case of coca, maybe it's worth it to bleed money for a while. Like what Amazon did in the diaper business.

      I'm more with the originator of the coca discussion, though. Because some of the better successes in modern startups get cashflow quickly and do a more agile launch strategy so they can refine without sinking a ton of money and time into something that doesn't work in the market. Those startups tend to have respectable coca numbers, but it's just one part of the overall situation.

      [–]Glenbert 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      It means Cost of Customer Acquisition. Might use COGS in another context. It should be evident to any self-anointed CEO why this matters. Unless your numbers make sense, you're just a kid with an idea.

      [–]Kerberos- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Costs of customer acquisition, a very important metric when valuing young firms going through a big growth and expansion phase.

      [–][deleted]  (11 children)


        [–]17 Endorsed ContributorHumanSockPuppet[S] 11 points12 points  (9 children)

        This comment does not add to the discussion. Take it elsewhere.

        [–]MCrazyHorseInvincible[M] 3 points4 points  (0 children)


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

        It adds about as much as the original comment, which is truly just unproductive bitching.

        [–]Glenbert 2 points3 points  (2 children)

        I am undermining her premise and what's implied by it. I'm doing that based on my exposure to people of her age in business. They're generally entitled prestige whores and it's tiresome.

        "Bitterness" aside, the "CEO" of a 7 person company is not doing 80% of the shit that a real CEO is doing. Really, you are a Founder or President at that point.

        Others on TRP have already addressed the other issues with this woman's missive.

        [–]ilirm 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        "CEO" of a 7 person company reminds me of my buddy who worked Internet marketing for a sleep clinic. he called himself VP of Marketing. LOL.

        [–]Glenbert 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        I keep picturing Pajama Boy when I read this comment of yours. Do you resemble him? Do you uptalk?

        [–]Infinitezen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Well, being bitter about it or them is completely counter productive and toxic to your mental health.

        [–]elevul 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Someone let her know that those men won't be fucking her, but she can find plenty of men elsewhere who will treat her like a woman and provide exactly what she needs, in the exact same ways men (generally) don't fuck the women they meet at work, but fuck women outside, to avoid trouble.

        [–]mvg210 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        There's no free lunch I guess

        [–]passionr 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        Interesting. I work at a consulting firm and hooked up with a female coworker this past weekend. She was very concerned that if people found out, she would be labeled as a slut and taken less seriously while I would be looked at as more of a boss. What do you guys think of this?

        [–]tilzilch 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Never a good idea. I think you'll both be looked at with disdain if management finds out. Being labeled a slut is the least of your concerns.

        [–]Havib3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Saw this thread and immediately knew it would pop up on TRP.

        [–]Modern__Day__Pricus 2 points3 points  (0 children)


        You pretty much nailed it.

        Nothing to add here.

        Great find man.

        The fuckery I swear. The other side of the fence is called THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE because you can't take the former side with you.

        Welcome to life as a man. Take it away Gus

        [–]theultimatewarriors 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        As a business leader, your responsibility is not to breed, but to make sound business decisions so that everyone in your company can continue to profit and prosper.

        I'm gonna disagree here. I don't think having a baby has anything to do with it. It's more so that it's going to be hard for a man to maintain his confidence dating this woman. Because for a man to have a healthy ego (confidence) it usually means he's doing his best at competing in some field. As smart as she is, I imagine she is going to question a lot of decisions in the relationship, which is the exact opposite of what most men want when they make a decision, because it shows lack of trust, which means lack of intimacy usually too because the woman refuses to make herself vulnerable (which is often the best way to make a man care for a woman).

        The equivalent would be if a girl was dating a guy who cared about his looks and was asking if certain clothes made him look good and checking himself out in the mirror and adjusting his hair more than the woman did, she wouldn't feel confident enough to make him happy unless she was much hotter than him to where it didn't matter.

        That's why the comment about old money made me laugh too. A lot of the old money guys I've met who had it easy (not all, but a lot) could be some of the biggest pussies I've ever met in my life. They simply didn't understand what it took to hustle and push through bullshit you didn't want to do. They didn't understand training towards what you wanted more than just getting it. So there's probably a huge dichotomy of this woman being extremely bullheaded with these men, and them wanting women who didn't push them at all.

        Her only option is to hope that someone who is richer and more confident in their decision making (in a way that they can dominate her and she can be confident in their decision making to take care of her) decides that they want to have a relationship with her (but those same men will have more options than any men, which means that they also will have women who have awesome woman game to choose from and make everything else in their relationship life easier for him, and not many women understand that keeping a man means knowing strategies to keep them happy). That or she ends up making a bad decision and trying to have a relationship with a man with delusional confidence (the dj's, the drug dealers, the bikers, the rock stars, etc..), but my guess is that she challenges them a lot too.

        Gonna be rough for her to find a good man without working on her woman game, which is even harder to find for women (actual quality good advice, not stupid magazine bullshit).

        [–]Just_for_boobs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Or she could begin with what other successfull CEO's do- paying for pussy.

        [–]ztsmart 2 points3 points  (4 children)

        Personally I would find a successful woman much more attractive than some unambitious girl that is not competent and capable of getting things done herself.

        I would love to date a girl who is on my level professionally because I think she would bring more to my life as a teammate and partner. I am generally pretty turned off by girls who are complete fuckups

        [–]1 Endorsed Contributorvandaalen 3 points4 points  (1 child)

        That only applies if you aren't looking to start a household and have kids. She will most likely always put her career in the first place and if she doesn't you'll nearly inavitably be facing some serious nagging about how you and your kids ruined her career.

        Provided you aren't a big fan of having your kids raised by some mexican maid.

        [–]Diabolo_Advocato 4 points5 points  (1 child)

        What you aren't getting is that guys that are really successful to the point of that woman CEO have so so many options. She may be attractive, but I doubt she could hold a match to some women out there or even some other Victoria secret model.

        Why would a wealthy guy go for an Amy Poehler-ish woman when he can get Scralett Johansson look-a-like.

        [–]JamesRoscoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Give this book a whirl. After that this lady will no longer be a mystery.

        [–]MagnanimousGenius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I would say the middle ground is busting the balls of your beta male husband for the rest of your life

        [–]damflite 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        Seriously, how can you have sex with someone you respect? heh

        [–]Darkwoodz 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        I'm not saying a disagree with your analysis, but theres the possibility that she isn't attractive and that is why the guys aren't interested in her.

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

        There's actually a high possibility of that being the case. I know very few physically attractive female business leaders. Most pretty girls have other priorities in life than investing sweat and tears into a business.

        [–]1kick6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        The telling part is this:

        I know I'm an attractive girl, I take care of myself, keep myself in shape, and I'm focused and bullish in business...

        This is the short list of things she assumes men find attractive. Even after an entire article telling here that the last bit: "bullish in business" isn't's still on her list of what she thinks men find attractive. The lack of introspection is fucking impressive.

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

        "I came here to BREED, not to LEAD"

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

        annnd if the guys did hit on her, they would be sexist pigs*

        (*unless they were sufficiently attractive or successful, then they would be 'men who know what they want and aren't afraid to go for it')

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

        You can either be:

        Strong, independent, respected and forever unloved or Protected, provided-for, and subservient to the man who sweats and bleeds for you. There is no middle ground. Make your choice and live with it.

        There has to be a middle ground, right? I mean you just have to separate business from Love/ pleasure.

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

        No, you can't. Not if you're mate-hunting on professional grounds. Not when there are laws that govern what constitutes sexual harassment in the workplace. Not when a rebuffed sexual advance or a failed relationship compromises your position to advance your career.

        Her value as a sex provider is in direct conflict with her value as a wealth and opportunity provider. No surprise then, that men find her wealth provision potential to be a better and safer long term bet than her pussy provision.

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

        No. Check out what she said about the matter.

        She spends a lot of time working, there isn't a lot of time for love or pleasure. Sure, she could work less hard and make more time for a romantic life. But then her business would fail and the respect that those CEOs had for her would evaporate.

        Someone seeking a middle ground here would end up like the donkey that starved to death between the two piles of hay, trying to decide.

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

        I would like to stand and applaud your post, alas, all I have to give is a meager up vote.

        [–]ZaoMedong -5 points-4 points  (3 children)

        There are families where both the man the woman work... so that's a false dichotomy. Also, you're generalizing half the world's population based of the testimony of a single businesswoman from the United States.

        [–]TheSKSpecial 5 points6 points  (2 children)

        The "false dichotomy" you're referring to is one you just made up. Nobody said women can't work. What is being said is that a woman who chooses to become a "strong, independent, career-driven woman" ends up sacrificing what would bring her happiness in a relationship.

        Not to mention, very little of the world even has women facing this dilemma of having to be "career-driven business women" who have to take on masculine traits in order to succeed. This is very much a western thing. Most cultures still follow gender-based roles where the male provides and protects and the female nurtures and cares.

        [–]2asd1100 -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

        I disagree, there is a middle ground. You can work and not become a man. Sure you won't earn as much get as much respect but you can have a profesional worth and have a satisfing job that exercises and reinforces your female traits.

        The main issue this chick has is that her best description of her business style is bullish. That is not a attractive train in any woman.. She is advertising that only a masochist that wants abuse could ever be happy with her.

        [–]squishles 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        anything else doesn't really work ceo level, sometimes you can be soft and it's more effective, but you still need to be capable of bringing the hammer down.

        I guess you could be thinking women in adjutant positions ect that sort of thing, but your still not going to have an easy time getting dates through coworkers/bosses ect like that. There has been a lot of work done to make that sort of thing insanely dangerous for men.