912
913

Red Pill TheoryWomen do not give a fuck about your "feelings". (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by [deleted]

Lately we seem to have received a new influx of newbies who think that clicking "subscribe" to this subreddit is all that's required to "take the red pill", and more arrogantly, that their beta outbursts from that point onwards constitute red pill behaviour. This post aims to address one particular irritation I have with these people and red pill confusion - their feelings

More and more I see the nonsense peddled that to "front up", "grow some balls", and "tell a woman frankly how you feel" is red pill behaviour. Worse, that it's some kind of success story for an obvious beta orbiter to come here, read a few headlines, and then profess their feelings to their disinterested target and awkwardly break free from their orbit by stamping their feet and whining that "they just can't do it anymore" (waa waa waa). It isn't, and the quite frankly ridiculous upvoting of the positive comments to such behaviour is a worrying development for the signal to noise ratio of this subreddit.

When it comes to feelings start by remembering this - woman discuss their feelings (mostly for the same reasons that they do anything else, for validation and attention), men simply act on them.

There is no reason, at all, ever, to discuss your feelings with a woman. Firstly it's a waste of your time because they don't care (they get no validation or attention from it after all), and secondly it does irreparable harm to your frame and SMV, and is a sure fire way to render any vagina as dry as the sahara in minutes.

Why? Because women don't care about how YOU feel, they only care about how YOU make THEM feel. They care about the tingles you give them when you maintain your alpha frame and the SMV you have in public, they care about the protection they feel when they are out in public with you, they care about the direction and purpose you bring to the relationship and in turn their lives, they care about the financial security and social status you bring, they care about the orgasm you give them when you let your testosterone take over and give them the rough fucking they so desperately crave.

Women are programmed to be nurturing towards their young, not their men. Men are there to provide and protect while they raise their young, and if they have to be nurturing towards you too that means you're a poor protector and provider. Displaying any trait that reflects poorly on your ability to be a strong protector and provider is infuriating to a woman, because nothing annoys a woman more than accidentally fucking a beta.

For their men they are simply interested in what you can provide, and what they have to do for you to keep providing it.

Do yourself a favour gentlemen, keep your feelings to yourself.


[–]primevalist 349 points350 points  (74 children)

You can show emotions around women, as long as these emotions are reasserting your dominant, masculine, primal and passionate side. But never make a mistake of showing emotional or mental weakness, because even though she will appear to be compassionate, deep down inside she will lose respect for you.

[–]asdfghjkltyu 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Also they will try and trick you into expressing emotions constantly, asking you how you feel, expressing your thought process and emotions on a topic. If you fall for this you fail. You have to talk strongly on a particular subject about what the outcome you desire is going to be, not the feelings that got you to that decision.

While women will want you to express on some level in extreme situations sadness and empathy (such as when someone has passed away or has gotten injured) in your day to day life almost all discussion of your feelings or feeling of uncertainty are not welcomed.

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 10 points11 points  (2 children)

This is a very common relationship shit test men fail, myself included. Do not let this happen to you. The moment you give in you've given up frame control.

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

I'm a private person anyway. Mostly because I realized most people don't care anyway.

[–]sammiemichelle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you all are really misguided by some shity women in your life. I'm a woman, and I don't see how my SO having moments of emotional weakness would lose my respect. He has been there for me when I've cried, and I want to be his shoulder to lean on too. Him opening up about issues in his life has only brought me closer to him, because in my opinion, it takes a strong man to admit that he is feeling weak. If you can't be open with the woman you love, then why even bother?

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

AMEN! Was laying in bed last night with my main plate laying on my chest. I had alot on my mind and couldn't sleep. Guess she could feel my unrest. She asked "Baby, can you not sleep? What's wrong? Wanna talk about it?". My response - "Everything's perfect." And I put my hand on her head and lay it down on my chest cause she had raised it up. Next morning, she woke me up with warm morning sex. Moral of the story: Always be the boulder in her stream of emotions. The only emotion that is acceptable by women are positive emotions. Happiness, awe, satisfaction, etc. All manly emotions. Like walking into a 3000 year old hand built church and her seeing your face of awe. That is a def panty dropper especially when you point out the beauty of the architecture and have her imagine the skill it took to build it.

[–]magicalbird 77 points78 points  (10 children)

You can show feelings around women as long as it relates to her tingles.

[–]2alisonstone 5 points6 points  (1 child)

When you are with a woman, you are playing the role of CEO. The captain of the ship. The captain of the football team. You can show emotion. Many leaders do. But that must never compromise your ability to lead. You can be upset that something went wrong. But you cannot demonstrate that you are unfit to continue leading. Imagine the captain of a ship acting scared, sobbing, and saying that he has no idea what to do and the world is so unfair to him because his GPS broke. He should be immediately relieved of duty because he is going to cause a panic.

You can be pissed. You can be sad. But you are never without a plan. You are never uncertain. You never stop leading. The moment you fail to lead, it is the woman's duty to relieve you of the husband/boyfriend position and relegate you to beta orbiter status, just like how the board can relieve the CEO of his duties if the CEO demonstrates he is unfit or incompetent.

Remember, men are the disposable sex. A single man can impregnate many women a day, for several decades. On the other hand, fertility for women is much more limited and a pregnancy is a long and dangerous process. If a man cannot lead, protect, and provide for his family, he is pretty much useless. Biologically, it would be prudent for her to be completely turned off by such a man because he poses a great threat to her survival and her offspring's survival. There are plenty of other men that can provide sperm.

Remember, you are the CEO/captain. You wouldn't cry and whine while you are on the job. Don't do it in your relationship.

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (16 children)

This. Also, never be lead by or make decisions based on emotions, that's feminine behavior.

[–]Dorrog 39 points40 points  (14 children)

Neurology has discovered that all decisions are emotional. Being purely logical is impossible for a human.

This idea of the purely logical guy is just bad broscience.

[–]DannyDemotta 28 points29 points  (2 children)

Strawman. OP didnt indicate pure, 100%, solely, or any similar word choice.

You let intelligence propel you, logic steer you, and use emotions to make fine (not wild, not jerky, not frivolous) adjustments.

[–]boxofcookies101 9 points10 points  (9 children)

But there's a difference between doing something because of how you feel and weighing out the pro's and the cons. Most decisions are influenced by emotions however is it is possible to look at things as they are and take the personal opinion out of them.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Strictly speaking we humans are not capable of looking at things completely objectively. We all have bias. Now it is true that some people are more objective than others, but nobody is completely objective. So no, strictly speaking, its not possible for humans to look at things as they are.

  • Humans aren't capable of looking things objectively
  • Yet, some people can be more objective than others
  • But yet, we cannot see things as they are

Your definition of objectivity is basically "well-informed subjectivity free from emotional influence", which isn't just unattainable but also pointlessly pedantic. How would an objective decision be superior to an informed emotionally influenced subjective one? This is basically an ad hominem against our nature because it implies that every opinion that we could possibly form is bad when compared to its undefined objective counterpart.

An informed subjective decision towards the best outcome is what most people refer to "logical" with the same way "a man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills" is sufficient to be called "free will". Now, stop attacking straw-men.

Bonus edit: We're also not free from being influenced by external causes that favor our own actions (luck). Just because it's unattainable to be "free from influenced by luck" doesn't mean that our skills and abilities are undermined when compared to a universe where luck is a non-factor (which again, it's unattainable and pointlessly pedantic to compare with).

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (5 children)

pedantic undergrad garbage

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Hear, hear! He's missing the forest for the trees.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's an ideal you do your best to approach - more successful men get closer to that ideal than less successful men. Even some of the obvious counterexamples, like emotional musicians who are massively famous and wealthy, often went about building their business, networking, and handling everything other than the making of the music in a very logical, strategic manner.

Try to make decisions purely based off of logic, and you'll fall short, but land in the area of good decisions. Neurology is not the end all, be all; in 50 years we will likely have different neurological theories about emotions, decisions, and so on. For instance, it's likely the majority of us feel an emotional pull towards one pole of a decision all of the time, but we have the logical ability to override that pull. A neurologist would measure the heightened brain activity in relevant areas and conclude "emotional decision" when in reality the decision was to resist the emotion.

[–]PsillyWolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Andddddd that's how I lost my first love

[–][deleted] 66 points67 points  2&&(n[t].style.display="none")}else{e.innerHTML="[–]";for(var n=document.getElementById(e.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.id).children,t=0;t2&&(n[t].style.display="")}}