all 109 comments

[–]ThirdLegGuy 184 points185 points  (14 children)

A woman will submit to you when you’re a man worth submitting to. She will ride you all night long and let you plow her like a caveman if you’re a man worth fucking. She will let you father her children, lead her family, plan all of your dates, handle all of your affairs, and trust in your judgment, but only if you’re a man worthy of her trust. If you’re a man who actually has worthwhile judgment. She’s not going to hand the reins of her life to just anybody, and especially not the reins of her children’s lives. You have to be worth a shit. But if you’re worth a shit, you might have a dozen women lining up to turn their lives over to you, and all you have to do is say yes.

And here comes the understanding that if you're perfectly fine doing all this stuff by yourself - turns out you're so complete that you don't need a woman in your life - save for sex, emotional comfort (if she's capable of providing it) and children.

There is a fun saying regarding banks: "A bank will lend you money if you prove you don't need it." You can paraphrase it this way:

"A woman will submit to you if you prove you don't need her."

[–]17 Endorsed ContributorArchwinger[S] 100 points101 points  (3 children)

I'd almost go as far as to replace "prove" with "realize."

It's not about qualifying yourself to women or trying to prove anything to them. That's actually needy, unattractive behavior. But living an awesome life of your own is like girl bait.

[–]Dr_Avocado 10 points11 points  (2 children)

I disagree, you can realize you don't need women but still be unattractive as fuck.

[–]SenorPuff 16 points17 points  (0 children)

And you can have money and status with no frame and therefore be 'unattractive as fuck' once you open your mouth. It's not just one thing. Take care of your body, your bank account, your social life and your game. They're all important too.

[–]DartsandFarts 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think that's why he put the "living an awesome life of your own" in. I mean you're right, but chances are if you actually are living an awesome life there will be plenty of women wanting to be a part of it.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)


    [–]Aneomorpheus 15 points16 points  (0 children)

    This last sentence should be the Red Pill mantra.

    [–]mega_beta 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    I know I can always do better, so I don't really need to convince myself I don't need her.

    [–]ThirdLegGuy 6 points7 points  (3 children)

    You still need to convince her, with your attitude and abundance mentality.

    [–]tallwheel 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    If you truly know you don't need her, then she can probably tell. It comes out in your demeanor and everything you do/say.

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

    I think a woman is a burden. Is she doing enough to equalize this burden? If not, then I can do better.

    [–]DoctorWelch 46 points47 points  (19 children)

    Great post. There is so much hate for marriage in this sub, and rightfully so, that I think there is a tendency to miss some really important parts of LTR game such as this very subtle thing you pointed out.

    People often use AWALT as a negative thing, but it doesn't have to be if we know how to use it. Whether it is to spin plates or shape a decent women into following us, taking advantage of this knowledge is the essence of TRP.

    [–]1tombreck2 13 points14 points  (6 children)

    AWALT is a good thing provided you are a member of this sub

    [–]IceColdTang 25 points26 points  (1 child)

    Another way of looking at it, in my opinion, is that acknowledging AWALT is essentially accepting the fact that you cannot change women, therefore you change yourself (and your strategies). This realization is important in many aspects of life, not just inter-sex relationships.

    edit: typo

    [–]1tombreck2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Yep. You may not like it but it's the way it is

    [–]qwertthrowaway 11 points12 points  (2 children)

    Just imagine if every woman was fundamentally different.

    The red pill would not exist. There would be no one strategy to "get women". Every discussion about relationships would be void, because it would all be decided on a case-by-case basis, you can't come to any conclusions. No man would exist who is "good with women".

    It would be madness.

    [–]1tombreck2 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Just imagine if every woman was fundamentally different.

    That sounds like a slogan of the bluepill

    [–]MamaTR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    So are AMALT? Because I know plenty of dudes that are terrible at making friends and then some dudes make friends with everyone. So whats the strategy at being good at making friends, is there a pill for that?

    [–]2asd1100 5 points6 points  (11 children)

    I think it's reason not hate. I think marriage is a expired institution that rarely gives you anything other that some technical advantages enforced by society. I think like polyamory, there are drawbacks and benefits but it's shouldn't be judged miopically based on it's history.

    If you could secure a woman's comitment by law, literally making it ilegal and punishable to cheat and if a woman could secure your resource literally making it ilegal for you to not give her your money. They you'd have a case. BUt that is sharia law you would be advocating. And we all know how us post existentialists feel about that type of primitivism.

    [–]ryno55 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Well, fuck the laws, let people make their own marriage contracts. But in this government, it's one size fits all, for whatever state you happen to be in.

    [–]2asd1100 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    fuck the laws, let people make their own contract?

    you do understand that a contract enforced by one person is much more likely to be broke than one enforced by the government.

    You either accept laws, or you find a way to live without/ besides them, you don't get to pick and choose like women or MRAs.

    Also to get on that one fits all paradigm, if it wherent for it, you would probably get nothing or a harem depending where you are in the sexual market, so don't think you are only loosing in this traditional framework.

    [–]DoctorWelch 0 points1 point  (8 children)

    I call it hate because, although there are reasonable arguments against the current legal institution of marriage, there is a somewhat irrational aversion to LTRs from people still in the anger stage.

    People often ignore the fact that all these divorce rapes and messed up relationships where AWALT turns against these men is because those men are beta as fuck. To expect the same results out of an LTR or marriage from an experienced RP man and a beta bitch is completely irrational.

    [–]Dis_mah_mobile_one 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    You're correct, but on the other hand if a truly RP man has options because of his knowledge and value then an institution designed to grant near-every man a wife regardless of whether or not he could keep on willingly has marginal value to him.

    Either way, an RP man benefits without having to rely on a traditional relationship route.

    [–]DoctorWelch 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    We need to be able to make a distinction between the legal institution and the actual relationship. An LTR with a quality woman who follows you definitely has value while the legal institution is completely fucked.

    [–]2asd1100 -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

    although there are reasonable arguments against the current legal institution of marriage, there is a somewhat irrational aversion to LTRs from people still in the anger stage.

    Don't use blanket statements or half arguments.

    Let's not even consider the legal aspect, just the relationship in itself I think modern women are incapable in our current environment to be satisfied with one man for 10+ years. And I think a man that stays committed to a woman that he is not attracted to anymore and that did not gave him children is a fool.

    To expect the same results out of an LTR or marriage from and experienced RP man and a beta bitch is completely irrational.

    What is irrational is to stagnate on a concept out of sheer romanticism.

    A red pill man is still a man. he would have to be really dark to endure the continuous onslaught of a disgruntled woman(because you aren't only in a relationship with her her, you are fighting the environment that is PRO feminism and she internalises that belief system, be it from bitter friends or colleagues or even the media). Conversely as time passes she learns your tricks fast and adapts, not to mention that attraction is a volatile beast when it shares the same house as familiarity, so your effect will be incrisingly weaker.

    On the other hand, a DT man would never settle, he would not put a principle in front of his happiness so he wouldn't bother with a declining relationship.

    The female and male psyche isn't constructed to "win" it's constructed to fight. Once you made it you got a partner you either have kids or nature takes over and pushes both of you back on the market.

    [–]DoctorWelch 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Not really sure what your argument is. If it is that the institution of marriage is fucked, no one is arguing. If it is that most women aren't worthy of a relationship, no one is arguing. Very few women even have the potential for an LTR and even then RPW are made through leadership, not born.

    If your argument is that LTRs don't benefit RP men in any way, well then that is completely debatable and subjective. Maybe you personally don't see any benefits for the risks, but that doesn't mean your decision or view is "correct" for everyone else.

    [–]2asd1100 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Very few women even have the potential for an LTR and even then RPW are made through leadership, not born.

    ok, my argument is that our brains are made so that LTR from a game perspective become harder and harder. Without a conscious coercion, neither man or woman can keep it together. That conscious coercive element can be the church, divorce law or children. But just leading won't be sufficient, it's a uphill battle and everything gets harder(from a game perspective).

    No, I don't think as men we need to go optimal on all things. I personally think having a kid is purposeful. The most stable environment for a man to grow is a LTR and marriage happens to fill in that gap, effectively although in itself it's not only unhealthy and masochistic but actually toxic as it releases responsibility for the couple from making one another happy. I have seen a lot of good men go fishing for the white whale and deluding themselves into frenzies of hamstering to a level that a beta orbiter doesn't even reach, refusing to see themselves for what they have become. It's a black hole where red men go to age. Once there you either become a domesticated traditionalist(and these women are lion tamers, these have a fortitude and will that make feminists wet) or they realise what life really is and finally swallow that bitterest of pills and go die a MGTOW.

    [–]DoctorWelch 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I would say a LTR is difficult for sure, but this idea that it is a constant ramp upward in difficulty or a constant wear and tear at the man is completely fallacious. If you want an LTR you need to start, baseline, at the very least, with a woman that wants to be submissive and fulfill traditional roles. Low partner count. Good family history. Many would say introverted. There is information already out there on what to look for.

    From there you still have to be on top of your game and lead her so that the relationship can be healthy. And yes, every individual case is different and shit might hit the fan even if you do things correctly. But over time I think establishing yourself as the dominant captain of the relationship means keeping up the healthy dynamic is no longer hard work. It still takes action, but that action becomes second nature to you as a RP man.

    If you've been on the RP for awhile and start incorporating these things into your daily life you eventually find that what once took effort is now just natural. I see no reason why keeping a healthy LTR dynamic would be any different. So, this idea that all LTRs or marriages are engineered to fail is ridiculous. Even IF the divorce rate is something like 50%, that means 50% of people aren't getting divorced. So, as a RP man that knows what to look for in a woman, how to act in the relationship, and the dangers of LTRs and women, I think my chances are the best anyone could hope for to create a healthy LTR.

    You might see those chances and still take a different route. That is perfectly fine, but that does not mean those of us that might chose that route are making the wrong decision.

    [–]2asd1100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    but this idea that it is a constant ramp upward in difficulty or a constant wear and tear at the man is completely fallacious.

    We use difficulty differently. I was referring to difficulty in game, because on the surface it get increasingly easier until the day you realised you are worst of, which you rationalise as insignificant and so on until you lose: you are either too comfortable to care or to weak to do anything about it.

    I disagree with the traditionalist and introvert fallacy they are just flavours of the same issue. Having a durable relationship is not the same as having a happy relationship. Both are arguments for durability above all else.

    Leading is not the issue. The issue is that you are venturing increasingly difficult waters and your resources dwindle.

    I see no reason why keeping a healthy LTR dynamic would be any different.

    because people are adaptive, we aren't constant. She will adapt to your game and the comfort will lover the overall quality of your game.

    Divorce is not a factor in determining happiness of the relationship. You can get a passive, introvert or even someone abused and you will have your happy ever after. Well it will be ever after, but I guarantee you it won't be happy.

    I think my chances are the best anyone could hope for to create a healthy LTR.

    yes, definetly, but you can't counter nature. We aren't meant to be happy ever after with only one person without external influences.

    but that does not mean those of us that might choose that route are making the wrong decision.

    Of course not, YMMV, just pour me a drink if by chance it happens I was right.

    [–]teeay 35 points36 points  (1 child)

    You wanted a woman to want to have sex with you. Because that’s good sex. That’s validating.

    This is exactly the conclusion I reached earlier today. When I was in beta mode I wanted "sex with emotional connection" rather than "hollow casual sex". I wanted to be needed, emotionally, and have that expressed in sexual terms, thinking this was the pinnacle of open, vulnerable, evolved human feeling. What I've come to realise is that this was actually a deficiency in me - I was basically just projecting my neediness on to others, and expecting them to be needy and broken in the same way I was (still am, a bit, but I'm working on it).

    That didn't work out so well for me, unsurprisingly - two needy people together is always ultimately a clusterfuck. Two strong people, who don't actually need each other, but who choose, and actively desire each other (at least at the time, desire is a fickle thing) are a far more mature and skillful arrangement. And it is validating, at least for men. Knowing you are strong and desirable in yourself is a far better validation rush than being a needy bitch and convincing someone else to give you what you (think you) need. Even when it works for a while, which it basically never does.

    This thinking model also explains oneitis fairly neatly. It's the difference between "OMG she's so special I neeeeed her, but she doesn't want me and I'm going to spin in an emotional pain cycle and beg and plead until she gives me what I want (or get over it when that approach inevitably doesn't work)" and "I'm good, I'm strong, I'm worth having and wanting, and I'm going to pursue what I want and get it". You can still desire the other person of course, but if they don't really want you back then meh, someone else will. Their loss.

    It's taken a while but I think I get it now. Thanks for taking this to the next level.

    [–]Fir3start3r 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Thanks for that reply; it just hit me square between the eyes.
    This is exactly what I was doing too!
    Wow, how fucked up is that right??
    I believe I'm starting to come out of my depression phase and concentrating on myself. Learning to find and love myself again.
    And never again shall I want to meet that empty, half-shell of a former man AGAIN...

    [–]shelbzaazaz 13 points14 points  (0 children)

    RPW here with some input.

    This is correct, essential, and ultimately satisfying on both ends in an LTR or marriage game. Women need to want to make their men happy just as well, if you want an as-close-to-a-unicorn-as-you'll-get type of relationship. This is because a woman making her man happy is a timeless keystone of femininity, essential to a perfect masculine/feminine balance. If a woman doesn't even want to meet her Captain's needs she loses that sense of femininity.

    If a woman is only playing at meeting your needs for the sake of temporarily satiating her anxiety, like OP said neither part will be happy but ultimately the woman will hop on the hypergamy ship as soon as she can. (This also means she needs "appreciation" for what she does... But good, mutually validating, enthusiastic sex per OPs post showcases that she's done a good job well enough.)

    I'm on my phone so I don't wanna type a novel but I hope that makes enough sense.

    [–]indomara 6 points7 points  (1 child)

    DIPLOMACY: The art of letting other people have it your way.

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

    TRP is men's answer to women's feminism. Both extreme (and interesting) ideologies between the two genders of a species to maintain the balance between.

    [–]Assaultman67 5 points6 points  (1 child)

    We don’t just want our women to do what we want. We want them to want what we want. And that’s a lot harder.

    I hear this all the time from girls.

    "I don't just want him to do it, I want him to want to do it!"

    [–]t21spectre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Ironically they are playing the same game, but with different goals.

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorTRPsubmitter 16 points17 points  (7 children)

    I'm not sure why TRP is so strong in its view that prostitution should be easily accessible (although I agree that prostitution should be legal since it's two consenting parties). It seems many recent posts on TRP by MGTOWs strongly argue that prostitution is some type of "men's right" and that it can be used as some type of trump card up their sleeve against the rat race that is the sexual marketplace ("Hey I'll just go monk mode and focus on earning money and will use prostitutes occasionally to avoid the shittests women throw at men. What a great idea, I now don't have to consider women at all in my life but still get laid").

    BUT, I have never been one to feel that prostitution could ever be superior to actually earning sex (other than convenience and discretion, which are real reasons). Why? Because I prefer a real sexual interaction. Sure prostitution satisfies our sexual release but it doesn't come as a result of something earned. It's not a measure of your sexualmarket value.

    That's why prostitution is fool's gold for those who think they can use it to opt out of the Sexual Marketplace™ and the economics that go along with it (tall, rich, smart, game, buff). Sure you can opt out and get laid by a whore, but I don't see how you can truly look in the mirror and be as confident as someone else who earned free pussy.

    Because like /u/Archwinger said, it's simply "making a woman do what you want"; it's not earning the great feeling that the woman actually wants to do what you want. To achieve that, you have to learn how to cultivate that desire in women; and you can't do it by refusing to interact with women.

    [–]Overkillengine 17 points18 points  (3 children)

    Legal prostitution does have a minor use in that it allows men to have the unspoken universal fallback of "Lady, you need to bring something more than just vagina to this interaction because I can get that from from a hooker for a lot less hassle (and possibly even expense) instead of you. No game or good looks needed, just money."

    Outside of that? Meh. Just sex. Not the same as being actually desired as others have observed.

    [–]Red_SoloCup 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    Two of my favorite quotes about prostitution:

    "The biggest difference between paying for sex and not paying for sex is that paying for it is a lot cheaper."

    "I'm not paying them for sex, I'm paying them to leave."

    I definitely agree with what you're saying. It's not nearly as good, but it makes the rest easier.

    [–]through_a_ways 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    This. People who bash (or discount) the importance of prostitution are only focusing on the immediate personal benefits, rather than the wider consequences.

    Same principle as pre-feminist marriage, dread was built into the contract. The more options and control men have, the more women want men. And both genders are collectively happier as a result.

    [–]thisjibberjabber 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Before there is universal legal prostitution there will almost certainly be very realistic humanoid robots with sex features. Seems like it will make at least some segments of prostitution somewhat obsolete. It would also remove ethical objections. It could also be a lot of fun for "threesomes" in LTRs.

    While I'd guess that being desired IS a lot more fulfilling than being rendered a service, I'm not sure it's because it's earned, at least for naturals. A guy could be a natural alpha, good looking, etc. and get laid a lot without much work. Would it be less satisfying for him? Not sure.

    I could guess it might be something like the dynamic where trust funders appreciate wealth much less than those who had to work for it.

    [–]AriMerman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I disagree. As the gatekeepers of commitment, our choice of where to allocate our resources is the decision we are left with. We don't get to decided whether sex is available or not. Whether you are investing your commitment in a ltr or investing in a prostitute, on a transaction by transaction basis, pragmatically, you are making the same exchange: commitment for sex.

    [–]tallwheel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yes. I feel the same about prostitution. It doesn't give the feeling of validation that actually being loved does, which is actually what a lot of the Johns are looking for more than sex.

    Slightly different topic, but this reminded me of RazorBladeKandy's recent video where he argues that prostitution is a manipulation of men using women's sexual power. I'm not sure I agree with him, but it's a fascinating idea anyway.

    [–]BluepillProfessor 12 points13 points  (7 children)

    The goal is not for women do what we want. The goal is for women to want what we want.

    Dread is not a direct threat, it is a state of mind. A man who has an abundance mentality is attractive to women- and no, they can't help it any more than we can help being attracted to boobs. I agree that by using Dread you are engaging in manipulation. However, the fear and anxiety you create is what charges a woman's sexual motor. Women will fuck for many reasons- and several of them include because the dude is "The Prize" and you become "The Prize" by not giving a shit because you have alternatives to a denying, shrewish harpy.

    Arch, I think you are using Male Logic (TM) to explain Dread. If a man has Dread used on him, he might fuck out of desperation or terror of losing the relationship but it is not going to turn him on and yes, the sex is not likely to be very exciting. The problem with your description is that women are different than men. Women DO get turned on when their man has options. They DO get turned on by desperation, and terror, and any strong emotion associated with her man. The sex a man gets from hard Dread is not sub-par at all. You are mistaken.

    The reason is the same reason for many quirks about women. Why do women stay in abusive relationship? Because the strong emotions are addictive to women. Why do women leave strong stable relationships and refuse to fuck a reliable man? Because he is not giving her enough strong emotions.

    TLDR: As counter intuitive and confusing it is for men, Dread at the right level makes a woman horny. When that happens she DOES want what you want.

    [–]17 Endorsed ContributorArchwinger[S] 25 points26 points  (1 child)

    We don’t disagree. Real dread game is subtle. Not “fuck me or I’ll dump you/cheat on you/kick your ass to the curb/set you on fire.” Real dread game is, if you reduce it to a very simplistic level, just living well. Having shit going on in your life, living that interesting life, being social and successful and engaged in that interesting life, and sticking to it.

    If you have that going on, you simply won’t have time to run around trying to kowtow to a disrespectful woman. You won’t have the energy. You won’t have the desire. You’re enjoying your life too much.  She’ll have to get her ass in gear or get left behind. No threat needed. Her being left behind would just be a very natural, subtle, seamless result of the awesome life you’re living.

    That kind of life is attractive to women. Not because they’re afraid, but because you’re awesome. It’s a question of levels, I guess. Like you say.

    When you’re a guy all of her girlfriends are gossiping about, and they all think highly of her for dating you, she swells with pride every time she puts your dick in her mouth.

    When you’re a source of drama and emotions and her friends tell her you ain’t no good for her, that’s still better than nothing. She gets attention and can tell stories about you.

    When you’re a boring chump following her around doing nice things for her, that doesn’t help her out socially at all unless she cheats on you or has a bad break up with you to generate some drama she can gossip about.

    [–]loveofnotes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Woah, that bit at the end about drama was eye opening. yet another redpill epiphany

    [–]tallwheel 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    If you're attractive to other women, you don't even really have to actively try to create dread. As long as she can see there are other women attracted to you and you could have them anytime you want instead of her, that's often enough.

    (You could certainly cancel out that dread if you acted like a supplicating beta who doesn't want to lose her, of course.)

    [–]Jooceyjooce 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    If you're attractive to other women, you don't even really have to actively try to create dread.

    Exactly. My wife looked a bit pissed off when we were coming home from dinner tonight, so I asked her what her deal was. I caught her off guard, and she said that she had been thinking of things to say to women that she could see were hitting on me. Just look good, take her out where other women can see you, and you'll have played enough dread game to last quite a while.

    [–]through_a_ways -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

    Arch, I think you are using Male Logic (TM) to explain Dread. If a man has Dread used on him, he might fuck out of desperation or terror of losing the relationship but it is not going to turn him on and yes, the sex is not likely to be very exciting.

    I agree with the first sentence, OP is "projecting" somewhat, and actually falling a bit into the unicorn trap.

    His reasoning goes that "we want women to want what we want, not do what we want". This reasoning is misguidedly bluepill.

    Women only do what we want if they want what we want, unless there are very obvious incentives that make the deal a transaction (like in prostitution, or having sex with a dealer for weed).

    What OP seems to be saying, is that women should want sex in the way that males want sex, and that is bluepill reasoning. He's looking at the attraction created by "dread" as a conscious process, instead of an unconscious one.

    At the same time, your analogy is off. If a man has dread used on him, it's not to get sex, it's to get resources or validation.

    [–]Red_SoloCup 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Ever gotten a bj from a girl who felt obliged to do it? It's completely different and not nearly as good as a bj from a girl who is absolutely stoked to have your dick in her mouth.

    There is a definite difference when a girl does what you want because she feels like she has to than when a girl does what you want because she wants to give you what you want.

    [–]smoothjazzanarchist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Posts like yours are really important for the members of the community who are just using TRP as a means to an end, and those outside the community who think we're just trying to manipulate and subjugate women. Because that's always going to backfire in the long run.

    Recently, I was checking out our watchdog subreddit TBP to see what kinds of misconceptions and resentment they had toward this community (spoiler: never do that, ignore them, their opinions are irrelevant and stupid), and I came across an ex-TRP poster with a crushing story that reeked of desperation, misunderstanding and ignorance. TL;DR two nerdy teenagers got into TRP, read all the techniques without understanding the philosophy and truly working on self-improvement/self-actualization, manipulated women and lost their integrity along the way. The techniques worked for one of the boys, he got a girlfriend, screwed everything up, sexually assaulted her then almost ruined their friendship.

    I felt bad for those kids, but let that serve not as a warning against TRP, but as a warning against being incongruent with your own values, deceptive and lazy. Yes, those kids were lazy. They wanted all the benefits of TRP without doing anything to deserve it. They wanted sex without having any SMV. TRP is about focusing on valuing yourself so you can be the man you want to be - a man that deserves high-value women, a good career and a happy life. A man that earns those things through hard work, discipline, and perseverance.

    All my life, I thought respect was something everyone deserved and I respected most people. I have always been very submissive. I did not understand that respect is something you earn and continue to earn through your actions every day. I wanted respect and love based on nothing but the knowledge that I was a respectful and loving person. In short, I thought like a woman. And no surprise, I was raised by women, I lived only with women and I was held to women's standards. I knew, from the men around me, that I needed to be more assertive, but I didn't know how.

    And once you're that kind of man, you're going to be a source of strength and guidance for the women in your life. If you understand that men and women are different (gender studies is nonsense), women are naturally attracted to men who embody traditional gender roles (and vice versa), and treating women in a way that makes them respect and love you is at direct odds with the feminist bullshit modern society uses to pacify and shame men, only then can you begin to apply TRP without being disingenuous and malicious. We call it a game because it is a game, and the game exists in every animal kingdom. Opting out of the game is really just opting in to ignorance.

    I was introduced to TRP through that r/bestof post that was gilded around 60 times. OP warned of the dangers of sexual strategy as manipulation and abuse while also pretending that he understood "Not All Redpillers" are manipulative and abusive. But after encountering problems with my own masculinity in life and actually lurking on TRP, I found that it's very self-aware, genuine and realistic. Posts like yours are a testament to that. They show what the most authentic members of the community really believe.

    Side note: when you say AWALT, I don't think you need to remind the community that "not necessarily all women are like that all the time omg I'm not generalizing I swear."

    AWALT can be read as "all women have the capacity to do that, it's in their nature, and it has served them well throughout the course of evolution." There is individuality among women and men, of course - various beliefs, hopes, values and personalities that will make people act differently in any given situation. But AWALT isn't about women-bashing. It's a warning not to take things too personally and to understand the female psyche works in a way alien to us men. At least that's how I think most of the community takes it.

    [–]Lt_Muffintoes 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Agreed on every point.

    I'm just going to add that nagging is the final resort of women who have not learned to communicate and have lost the ability to manipulate through sex e.g. through aging.

    A necessary, but not sufficient quality, in an LTR is open communication skills. Women who posses them generally do not become these nagging annoying cunts.

    [–]World_Class_Ass 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Thanks for the PDF. Fascinating read.

    [–]LeGrandDiableBlanc 5 points6 points  (6 children)

    A woman will submit to you when you’re a man worth submitting to. She will ride you all night long and let you plow her like a caveman if you’re a man worth fucking. She will let you father her children, lead her family, plan all of your dates, handle all of your affairs, and trust in your judgment, but only if you’re a man worthy of her trust. If you’re a man who actually has worthwhile judgment. She’s not going to hand the reins of her life to just anybody, and especially not the reins of her children’s lives. You have to be worth a shit.

    I struggle agreeing with this assertion. It depends on how you define 'being worth a shit' and/or being 'worth submitting to'.

    I have just seen too many women submit to dark triad shitheads that have no value whatsoever--out of shape drug addicted leaches that happen to be alluring due to their shittiness being mistaken for mystery.

    On the flip side, I know plenty of 'high value betas' that get no attention from women whatsoever. The rare instances of romantic intimacy they do get are unenthusiastic or from low quality women. These are even wealthy, in shape, value adding people who have their lives in order.

    [–]thisjibberjabber 3 points4 points  (2 children)

    It sounds like you might be confusing your judgment of what makes a good person (not that I necessarily disagree for the most part) with what women are instinctively attracted to.

    If you're a leader you'll be happy to have betas on your team. They'll work hard for you and with marketable skills get paid well. But that's not necessarily what women are most after.

    Attractive people can afford to be assholes to some extent because they'll still get laid/supported. So while their assholery works against them, it's a second-order effect, and in some cases it works for them, because there is some surface overlap between abundance mentality and not caring about other people.

    [–]LeGrandDiableBlanc 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    That's why I prefaced with

    It depends on how you define 'being worth a shit' and/or being 'worth submitting to'.

    What definition of having value do you think would fit with most women?

    [–]iopq 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    As similar to a tribal leader as possible. Since the majority of our history we spent in tribes and that's what women evolved to be attracted to - since the women having babies with the leader of the tribe had the highest chance of furthering their genes. So a guy that is the leader of a criminal organization totally fits the model of a tribal leader.

    [–]analredemption12 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    You need to learn what high value really is. It goes beyond looks, money, or game. It has more to do with confidence and inner game.

    Those 'high value' blue pill guys can't actually be high value because, by definition, they put women on a pedestal and don't value themselves enough.

    Drug addicts are also not high value, for obvious reasons, but I can see how they might get laid more than a blue pill nice guy. That said, getting laid != high value. Perceived, maybe, but that charade can't last forever. In the end they are dependent on something else to make themselves happy. Dependent people can't be high value.

    [–]LeGrandDiableBlanc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I understand what traits a women is attracted to and the reasons why.

    I just think it's not accurate to equate them with being high value in ways outside of sex appeal. Many of them are otherwise harmful, such as propensity for violence.

    [–]iopq 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    High value to women, not high value to YOU.

    [–]CDBaller 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    I feel like this should be in the sidebar.

    [–]Jimmypickles 1 point2 points  (5 children)

    Been on the sub for four monthes and never heard of "dread game", can anyone elaborate?

    [–]TekkomanKingz 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Why the fuck are people down voting this?

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

    it's bad advice that's wrong-headed, that's why I'm down-voting it. You control how things flow with / around you - it's beyond stupid to think you control what a woman thinks, feels or wants. Beyond even possible.

    To upvote that is retarded.

    [–]joshsoowong 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    "dread game" is when you hug a girl infront of another girl. *Notice the "dread" in her eyes. That is "dread game"

    [–]aww40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Dread game is essentially instilling dread into any given female by displaying to her that you are of high value and that she can be easily replaced. As a result, the aforementioned female tries much, much harder to win you admiration.

    Dread can be achieved in a number of ways but the most common way is to flirt with another woman infront of the women you're trying to instill dread in or to have women hit on you while she's there. An important note; this isn't accomplished by going "Hey, look at how high value I am. LOOK AT ALL THEEZE BITCHEZZZZZZZZ!"

    Dread game is implicit, it's a game of subtleties and announcing that you're high value just sounds like a poor attempt at posturing, which in most cases, it is.

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

    dread game is mentioned literally every single week 4 times a week. And the guy replying is wrong.

    Dread game can never be used by you being caught initiating the action.

    Dread game is when women flirt with you, hot girls show they want to be around you, and a girl, girlfriend, wife, etc., sees this and realizes she isn't high value enough to be lazy, instead, must be nicer to you, be more attractive, more sexy, putting out more.

    As soon as you're the one initiating the flirting with other girls & being caught doing so it's not dread game. Then it's flat out seeking women in front of your woman which will end in fights & if married, divorce.

    [–]nubfilter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I would love to see comments/FRs on (or from) this point of view. This is something I've understood (having women want to vs just doing) but frankly have not seen any detailed write-ups on from a pointed perspective. I think this is a /r/trpgame crossover but would be helpful nonetheless. Perhaps a 'trpcookbook' if you will.

    A suggestion on structure:

    The problem: i.e. I desire this specific behavior or outcome - NOT I wanted to bang this HB8, but I want women I am with to behave in X manner.

    Groundwork: These are the things that were laid down in preparation for the catalyst. i.e. your behavior is unacceptable, my buddy was telling me how awesome this thing his girl loves doing to him while she's blowing him is, etc.

    The catalyst: The turning point where the change actually occurred (this could be as simple as a one liner dread or more complicated)

    Maintenance: Ensuring the behavior is nurtured. i.e. I try to make sure I do X to reinforce behavior Y, I shut down her sjw friends comments and prevent relapse by Z.

    [–]1WishIHadMyOldUsernam 3 points4 points  (13 children)

    I'm going to add my perspective on that original post that prompted this one. When LeggyBlueEyes and I tried reconciling after our divorce, we tried literally everything. Marriage bootcamp, counseling, going back to just dating. Then I found TRP and things started improving almost immediately. Overnight, we were in love, happy, and fucking like bunnies.

    But the sad reality is that nothing, not even swallowing the pill, can reverse a decade of beta behavior. Some responses (for both of us) just became too ingrained, and while I was still trying to figure out how to apply the pill to various areas of my (and our) life I was expecting her to just follow suit, completing forgetting one of the core tenants: AWALT.

    It's not that women are inferior, it's not that they're evil, and it's certainly not that they're cunts. They're just not men; they don't process the world the way we do. They depend on us to do that for them. I failed her there because I expected her to be something she's not and never possibly can be.

    So learn from my fuck up, brothers. Even if you find that one-in-a-million unicorn, do not put her on a pedestal thinking that AWALT doesn't apply to her in some way. Because it does. And that's a good thing.

    And to /u/LeggyBlueEyes, I'm sorry I put that pressure on you. It wasn't fair to you; you're not cut out to have my back in a fight, even just a verbal one. I wish you nothing but happiness in your future relationship(s).

    [–]LeggyBlueEyes 3 points4 points  (6 children)

    You could have just let me down off the pedestal. I don't bite.

    [–]2asd1100 12 points13 points  (5 children)

    he still hasn't, so stop enabling him.

    [–]2asd1100 3 points4 points  (5 children)

    It's not that women are inferior, it's not that they're evil, and it's certainly not that they're cunts.

    do you see the back pedalling. Own your position man.

    If anyone misunderstands it's their fault and you correct their assumtion.

    Even if you find that one-in-a-million unicorn

    dude, WTF? she wasn't that special. you just projected everything you wanted to see and tough you need in her empty persona.

    I'm sorry I put that pressure on you. It wasn't fair to you;

    wow, a she lost a real winner here. SORRY DOESN*T MATTER, you are just trowing your guilt and bad feelings at her gratuitously. You are doing the exact same thing you done while in the relationship. OWN YOUR ACTIONS, with all it's consequences.

    [–]colombia40 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yet another reason to work on raising your SMV. You'll have time to continue your own projects and goals without the bullshit manipulation and head games.

    [–]NOFAPFOOL 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    This post set a fire under my ass! Had to drop down and do 60 more pushups after reading this gold. I picture a black pimp typing this for some reason... Im not sure why but this seems like something a wise old pimp would say and I take it to be the truth because it is so.

    [–]Masonjarteadrinker2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Haha I feel you, not on the pimp thing but on the lighting the ass on fire part

    [–]MisterMisfit 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    One could argue that he couldn't care less about validation and is satisfied with the physical part of sex, therefore making prostitution a reasonable option on the side.

    [–]Masonjarteadrinker2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Not as satisfying IMO, YMMV though.

    [–]RhEEziE 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I would advise caution on manipulation in general. It pours over onto other relationships. You will start to separate who you are for the sake of controlling/directing a woman to do what you see fit. I've been down that road of never lost an argument, always got my way, and she fucking enjoyed it. But habit is either your enemy or your friend. When push come to shove people will go to the habit(practice makes perfect right?). So I caution anyone going down this road to be steadfast in keeping it under control when you least expect it.

    [–]Masonjarteadrinker2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Good fucken post, this is the truth.

    [–]Hilarious_Haplogroup 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    "A woman will submit to you when you’re a man worth submitting to."

    This means you are allowing her opinion of whether or not you are worth submitting to be the barometer of whether or not you are worth submitting to. This strikes me as putting the cart in front of the should decide by yourself that you are worth submitting to (particularly if you are pondering a LTR\wife) and know that some women will, and other women won't, submit.

    [–]17 Endorsed ContributorArchwinger[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Of course other people judge you. We live and die by those judgments. That’s how life works. Another person’s judgment and perception of you affects whether you have sex or whether you go home alone. Another person’s judgment and perception of you affects whether you lose your kids and half your wealth, or whether you stay married.  Another person’s judgment and perception of you affects whether you get a job offer. Or whether someone refers clients to you. Or whether you’re followed around in an expensive store. Or whether the police in your town give you trouble. Or whether the cool kids want to eat lunch with you.

    We live and die by our ability to make other people want us to succeed. If other people want you to succeed, you’ll go far. And whether or not they want that depends on their judgment of you.

    Do you know who the biggest losers in the world are? Idiots who are “true to themselves,” who strut around declaring, “I don’t care what anybody else thinks of me because I know I’m awesome. That’s ‘real alpha.’ Not like those other losers who put pussy on pedestals. I don’t care if they’re having sex and I’m not. I don’t care if they’re getting ahead professionally and I’m not. I’m totally a better man than they are because I’m true to myself and only care what I think about myself!”  That’s exactly how dipshit feminists with their self-affirmation, self-esteem-based stupidity think, too.

    If I’m a high powered attorney and you’re a kid fresh out of law school looking for a job, whose opinion of you matters more: Mine or your own? I’m going to hire you based on what I think of you, not what you think of yourself. Your job isn’t to think you’re awesome. It’s to make me want what you want for yourself. It’s to make me want you to succeed.

    There’s no objective measure of awesomeness. The 19-year-old girl with the spiked, dyed-black hair, combat boots, and 57 piercings and tattoos is going to think the guy in black leather with the shaved head and an entire body full of ink is more awesome than the guy in the Armani suit with a seven-figure salary who just beat Kraft in a major lawsuit and is going to be in the papers tomorrow.

    So yeah, you have to be your own kind of awesome. But your goal is to make others want what you want. And to actually work for that. Not to smile with smug satisfaction at how awesome you think you are while you rot in a corner alone.

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

    Of course other people judge you. We live and die by those judgments. That’s how life works

    No it's not.

    We real men live and die by our personal means alone; the judgment of others can be cast aside.

    [–]omglazers 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Preach. It's 100% confirmed red pill truth. You can't make women do what you want all the time. Controlling others that way is damn near impossible and a huge amount of upkeep. The real way to get what you want is to make the other person want to give you what you want. Being that person she can invest and trust in thanks to your demonstrated strength and intelligence.

    [–]1oldredder 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    100% blue-pill nonsense.

    It's a million times harder to control what someone wants rather than what someone does.

    Super-hard-mode for the same end-game benefits. Wrong way.

    [–]omglazers 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I know red pill tends to run salty or conservative but positive reinforcement really does work, especially in relationships.

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

    positive re-inforcement is only a hope; you don't actually control what a woman wants and you would only be mistaken to assume it.

    I'm not "salty" or conservative. Just a realist.

    In any case I'm much happier refusing to be in a relationship. The downsides outweigh the benefits. Sex is fine but relationships: no. No feelz for me.

    [–]iDont_too 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    withdrawing emotionally and becoming a ragin, pissy asshole are two polar opposites. The whole point in being strong and withdrawing emotionally is to avoid that side of you altogether. Becoming a raging pissy asshole is very beta as it shows that she can get to you, disrupt your frame, and that you are not in control of your own emotions

    [–]FateBender 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I don't quite agree with AWALT tbh. I think it's more like AWWALT [All WESTERN women are like that]

    [–]djvita 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    great post op, amused mastery to get the girl to want to do your wishes

    for that you need to be a master of your life.

    [–]Blocksblox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    an important point very clearly explained.


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

    This post makes no sense seeing as how TRP is a misogynistic sub that is all about getting women to do things for men's pleasure against their will. /s

    EDIT: Heeey. This had upvotes originally. What happened? Snarky comments not welcome anymore I guess.

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

    If you pay a prostitute for sex, then you got a woman to do what you wanted, didn’t you? Not really, because it wasn’t sex that you wanted. It wasn’t even free sex that you wanted. It was desire. You didn’t want sex, itself. At least not only sex. You wanted a woman to want to have sex with you. Because that’s good sex. That’s validating.

    Really: no. I don't care what they desire. They don't care what I desire. This validation stuff is maybe for the youngest who have never felt it. I couldn't give a damn.

    She might even fuck you out of fear to avoid that fate. Now you have a woman trying to manipulate you with sex, just like you manipulated her into sex. Neither one of you is happy or satisfied. The sex probably sucks, too.

    Nope. If she's gonna be there already she should be putting out. I don't care what her reasons are. Do you? I can't.

    The goal is not for women do what we want. The goal is for women to want what we want.

    I can't care. Women always want something I don't want & vice-versa. I don't control their minds. Don't need to. I care about the needs & deeds, not the motivations. I don't care. I won't care.