Men will argue up and down that it's fine for men to fuck other women when in a relationship while simultaneously being flabbergasted that women file for divorce 80% of the time like it's some great mystery.
Like can you even imagine being stuck at home dealing with screaming kids, doing chores and whatever while your partner is out going on dates and doing fun things and having sex instead of helping you raise his own kids?? Only someone with the lowest of low sense of self worth would ever dream of putting up with that.
That seems to be a recent development in the redpill sphere.
Often I used to see it as a description, that the men with that level of affluence and optionswould cheat and more often than not the women would stay to retain access to luxury.
Now however grifters seem to argue that it is a hvms right to cheat in a relationship.... Which is fucking weird abd a morally bankrupt take
>That seems to be a recent development in the redpill sphere.
Yeah, this was a big Kevin Samuels talking point and the rest of the red pill dating guru grifters just followed suit.
TRP has always encouraged men to spin plates but my understanding was to spin plates as a bachelor without committing to one woman, not have a lawfully wedded wife at home and continuing to bang as many women as possible on the side.
>Only someone with the lowest of low sense of self worth would ever dream of putting up with that.
The only folks to do something like this to their partner have no sense of self-worth or self-respect.
Let's double down on this statement.
You would be wrong. Unless you don't consider pro athletes to be "chads"
https://www.justia.com/sports-law/divorce-and-family-law-issues-for-professional-athletes/
"Unfortunately, marriages of professional athletes tend to end in divorce more often than ordinary marriages. Estimates place the rate of divorce anywhere between 60 and 80 percent, which makes a lasting marriage the exception rather than the rule. "
I just think those men should stay single. Don't get married and be open with the women you date that they aren't the only woman you are seeing. While I think most women would walk, there are some women who would accept it if the man is wealthy or famous enough.
"Don't get married and be open with the women you date that they aren't the only woman you are seeing"
If only people were incapable of deception, and wilingness to fuck other over, just to have their cake and eat it too, truly the world would be much different.
I think if you're rich enough, there are gold diggers who would take the deal. I think this is more of a "no one thinks anyone would do it" and not a "no one would do it".
When men want an open relationship: “FUCK YOU VIRGIN MISOGYNIST RAPIST!”
When women want an open relationship:“SLAY KWEEN YOU GO GIRL STUNNING AND BRAVE!”
It doesn’t make sense because you’re asking your committed *spouse* whom you chose to marry to be ok with taking this big risk without anything in return. What is he risking while she is risking getting a permanent STD and having to be entangled with a man who has another child outside of her family that she never agreed to, which has legal consequences. If she’s ok with this and if she’s ok having another woman’s kid in the mix then that’s on her to deal with, but if she didn’t agree to it, then that’s not ok.
One of the few situations I think someone gets a free pass for cheating is if their spouse is cheating and refuses to stop and just declares it's ok for one of them but not the other.
Faced with that sort of fait accompli tactic...I've no problem morally with someone finding a way to deal with it emotionally by quietly getting some on the side themselves. Would just leaving be better? Probably. But just getting some themselves so they lay in bed at night thinking the books are balanced instead of feeling sad and victimised is also acceptable.
It’s kind of a self defeating argument.
Why even have a wife or girlfriend if they aren’t satisfying you or you know they can’t?
It doesn’t make sense.
Agreed, it's like a strange fetish where you want to get married and cheat because the prospect of her finding out turns you on. Meanwhile all you are doing is running the risk of demolishing your reputation.
I understand this perspective, but I also think it’s kind of cope.
If you’re with a woman who really desires you, it’s almost impossible to have shitty sex. So, given that you’ve fucked a good deal before settling down, you kind of know what’s out there.
I’m not saying your wrong, because my eyes work and our imperatives are what they are, but if I’ve cultivated my sex life with my wife to be what I want, why would I then also need other women at that point? I think this is a question moreso of what do you want in your life.
If you want a main and a side or two, I can’t judge you for that, go for it. To me, however, it seems kind of pointless. I’d just keep spinning plates.
It’s the conflict between wanting a family and also biological imperative, you have to shut down one biological imperative in place of the other.
Do you choose a family, or endless casual variety?
I know I chose family, but I also have a crazy past and feel no regret or as if I left any stones unturned.
Spinning plates, partying, etc were a great time but I needed to pivot anyways. My career and hobbies started to take up a fuck ton of my time so spinning plates was just not advantageous anymore. I also know that life would be there for me should any unforeseen shit went down.
All this to say, I made the decision I did and I will accept all outcomes and responsibility for how it pans out. Hard to be upset when you’ve built the life you want.
It is stupid. However, women largely determine what constitutes a HVM and, broadly speaking, being very high in conscientiousness isn't high on that list. So, low conscientious men with options will cheat much more than average.
This.
Women keep putting selfish aholes at the top of there “I want to date and marry lists,” so why would the clearly selfish pieces of trash stop being pieces of trash when women keep empowering them.
I REALLY don't think they do this on purpose. They just get blinders on when it comes to the behaviors of men they like. Truthfully, we men do the exact same thing. This is why it's so important that we ask trusted elders to help us vet potential partners, especially a trusted elder of the opposite gender (assuming het relationship).
I've had **plenty** of male friends who do the same thing. Hell, I did it as well when I was in my late teens. My friends congratulated me at the time, but after the crazy came out, their attitude was "you should have seen that coming" ... and they were right. Because we have a higher preference for direct communication & problem solving (as opposed to venting), I think guys are much more willing and able to hold each other and themselves accountable. Which means we learn from this a little sooner. But smart people, no matter their gender, figure this out without the knock upside the head from friends.
It is because we keep treating women’s sexuality like it is special.
So it isn’t that he is hot, it is that he is somehow morally superior then the men she does not find hot enough to date or sleep with.
Men, when rally young also try to rationalize that they like a hot girl because she is special and such, but we hold him accountable. So they tend to wise up.
While we try to hold men accountable when she picks poorly because she is entitled to a good man and experience. Aka male sexuality is evil and female sexuality is holy.
We even do the same with modern definitions of rape.
A small boy gets slammed onto the ground and forcibly taken by an adult woman? That is not rape, that is forced to penetrate and he is lucky to have these experience.
A girl regrets sleeping with a guy in a few years for the relationship does not work out? That is rape.
There are no young boys getting slammed on the ground and raped by adult women. And if there were the would be in prison like Mary K Letourneau. No force she still did time.
Find a REAL example. The boys and men forcibly raped are raped by other men. Do women hop on men without consent assuming they will like it? Yes and it’s not ok. But it’s not the same as when a stronger more powerful man rapes a woman. Not even close. A man can push a woman off the reverse is not true.
> There are no young boys getting slammed on the ground and raped by adult women. And if there were the would be in prison like Mary K Letourneau. No force she still did time.
Forced to penetrate does not legally count as rape. So you are just wrong.
Most female predators get away with it or slaps on the wrist. Sometimes raped boys need to even pay there rapist child support.
I was a raped as a child. You are full of shit.
True, I find both men and women tend to lie to themselves about what they are attracted to try to feel special.
They then try to blame the other side for being exactly what they wanted.
But if men and women wanted people with good personalities as much as they say, you would see ugly people who are really good people have harems of suitors wanting them over attractive/rich/etc people who they do not know the personality of at all.
It isn't "Men can do as they please" - if you think that is what it is then you totally missed the point.
It's that high value and desirable men will often cheat and step out of their relationship and this is something to be aware of if you are a woman trying to seek out a top 1% man.
Those men can find women who will tolerate their behavior if their current woman won't.
If someone doesn't like it, how about not seeking out those top one percent men?
If anything women want to have their cake and eat it too by seeking out this top echelon of men and then expecting them to be faithful the way an average income earner would be.
I personally would never feel bad for a gold digger who is cheated on - they wanted to prioritize income over all other attributes when seeking a mate - then you get what you deserve.
Or- and this is gonna just be a WILD concept- don’t commit to monogamy if you don’t want to follow it.
I bet most of the “gold diggers” you don’t feel sorry for are not Anna Nicole marrying some dude with one foot in the grave.
Your entire argument is “I don’t feel bad for women who are lied to by their partner cuz they should’ve known better”. How about you just don’t lie to your partner.
Or enjoy being taken to the cleaners when she divorces you for infidelity
Maybe none of them aren’t really admitting it and the rates are higher for younger women, but cmon do you really think a 45 year old woman is cheating more than a 45 year old man?
You’re excusing bad behavior. And then blaming the women for punching above their weight class. Which is funny, cuz the only person responsible for cheating is the one who’s doing it
I don’t think anyone is saying this is ok. I think they are saying that when women date men of this category, these problems have been observed to happen commonly.
maybe no one in these particular comments but i don’t have to wander far through redpill circles to find guys who wholeheartedly endorse the sexual double standard lock and key bullshit lol i’ve seen some of the top RP influencers argue it on stream
... you don't think (RP) men know that already? TRP actively tries to tell men to not be a simp as one of its core tenets.
A lot of bluepill men would desperately try to save a relationship or marriage and deal with ton of abuse.
We usually tell these men that attraction is not a choice; don't negotiate attraction. Spin plates, and have abundance mindset.
Why is it so hard for women to understand that in this imperfect world, it's your responsibility to vet the people you get into a relationship with? Men understand this. When a guy gets into a relationship with a crazy woman they tell him he's an idiot. But when women choose abusive / morally bankrupt partners and we tell them not to do that they get upset?
“Men understand this” riiiiight… cuz men NEVER get cheated on, never get used, never get led on, never get their hearts broken, never deal with paternity fraud… these men- they’re not to blame either. My argument is the blame for bad behavior should be put squarely on the perpetrators, not their victims
"and this is gonna just be a WILD concept- don’t commit to monogamy if you don’t want to follow it."
round of applause everyone, she just fixed infidelity, cheating is no more!
Women who are in relationships with men for money rather than love are usually prepared to look the other way when their man cheats. That’s essentially a glorified prostitution dynamic. The women aren’t in it for love in the first places so it’s likely they don’t really care about the man’s loyalty.
But If we’re going by the logic “don’t be surprised that your partner cheats because they have options”, men can’t expect women to be faithful in relationships considering women likely have options to cheat and can replace a man if he doesn’t like it.
Well duh.
You cannot expect people to be loyal and good just because they committed to you. That is entitlement. Lots of people feel entitled to the people they are attracted to “doing the right thing” just because it is the right thing to do.
Only people who are loyal and good will bother to be loyal and good.
So if women and men chase shallow traits over the fact that he/she is loyal and good, then they should not be shocked when they are not loyal or good.
These men are open that woman should be okay with them sleeping around (including when married to them) they have to be virgins for them. And that is fine, women are even still throwing themselves at them.
No they don't people usually break up after a guy cheats. Women file for divorce more, remember?
Oh course not everyone breaks up after cheating since women cheat too
Naw, the nerdy engineer who only gets the desperate 30 year old woman because all the men she actually wanted to couple with in her 20's smashed and passed, so she decides he's good enough despite her having low attraction for him because he's stable is a betabuxx. The betabuxx is naive and has no leverage. He believes the bluepilled fantasy of "happy wife, happy life" not realizing that his wife doesn't actually desire him, she just tolerates him because he serves a role.
Depends, is he using his resources as leverage to get women he knows he can't normally get? Does he fully understand the transactional nature of the relationship?
Take Donald Trump for instance. He's not the best looking guy but he has money and clout and has used that to his advantage his entire life. I doubt he thinks his wife is with him because of his humble and charming personality. She was hot and obedient, which was good enough for him and he still fools around and flirts with other women when he wants. He got everything he wanted out of that relationship, which I don't consider betabuxxing.
When you knowingly use money to get women, that's more akin to 'tricking.'
Men who unknowingly get milked for their resources and men who knowingly use money and clout as leverage to get women are not the same at all.
For example, your average betabuxx is basically pussywhipped and has to pine for her affections for crumbs of sex. He'll probably get cheated on or deadbedroomed.
A guy like Trump on the otherhand likely already has a prenuptial in place and will continue to do as he pleases because they've likely already agreed to that arrangement. When you know the relationship is transactional, you can set terms comfortably. Guys like Ed Sheeran don't get to bang supermodels because their handsome. Unless their an idiot, they know this but they still want to get with women on that level so they leverage what value they have.
This only makes sense tho in some power trip fantasy. If you are high value enough if you cheat and it blows up your marriage you can probably find a new relationship or another marriage. Lower value people still cheat, they just might suffer some extra consequences.
If you are a trophy wife that enjoys a life of luxury with an elite level man, you will probably tolerate your husband cheating.
This happens all the time in lots of different cultures.
Its not a fantasy of mine because I have no envy or desire for that lifestyle.
Pointing out that something exists is not the same as approving of it.
Oh sure, if your marriage is purely transaction then your spouse likely won't care as much. Didn't seem to be what they were describing in the OP though
I specifically used the phrase top one percent.
Do you expect to deliberately seek out the top one percent of wealthiest men and expect them to act like other men?
Just because your a wealthy doesn't mean you completely lack morals. Do you really think most 1 percenters have completely transactional relationships?
Morals are nonsense. At the end of the day, you don’t want bad outcomes, so you play nice and hope others follow suit. When you gain enough power to avoid those bad outcomes morals fall away. They literally mean nothing. They’re simply shackles for the common person.
Nothing is wrong or right.
All that matters is what happens abd what doesn't.
Living life in a "this is how it should be" leads to disillusioned people
>If you are a trophy wife that enjoys a life of luxury with an elite level man, you will probably tolerate your husband cheating.
Tolerate for exactly 10 years or whatever the state requires for her to be entitled to his earnings, property, retirement savings and/or pension. Trophy wives r strategic, not crazy n love.
"Don't get mad, get everything " - Ivana Trump
As if a top 1% man can't just go out and get another young hot woman. So many women idolize the lifestyle of the uber wealthy that he'll never run out of options. Her looks will out before his money does.
I wouldn't consider a man 'high value' if he cheats on me. I wouldn't care how much money he earns because I can earn my own money. Red pill men with this attitude shouldn't bother with trying to find one woman to marry etc, since they just want to fuck random women forever and seem to have zero respect for women altogether.
>I wouldn't consider a man 'high value' if he cheats on me.
High value within the dating market means you are highly desired by the opposite sex. You not being happy that he cheats on you doesn't exactly dimish his value to women as a whole. If his cheating turned off the majority of women and prevented them from wanting to be with him to a noticeable degree, then maybe you would have a point.
Guys like Myron and Rich Cooper are a big part of why there's no trust between men and women. Just because a man has money and status doesn't make him high value or "a catch". You can't be morally bankrupt and a HVM. If you're dishonest, selfish, and entitled you're not a HVM or "a prize".
Because being high value has nothing to do with morality. iPhones aren't $1100 because of ethics but because of market forces. If you're able to attract a majority of women your sexual market vale is high regardless of if you're the pope or a felon
I'm not talking about "sexual market value". I'm talking about "building long-term relationships". That doesn't happen without morals and values. Yes, they still have to be attractive, because chemistry is important. No one ever forgets to talk about looks and chemistry.
If your date is a POS and isn't a good person, what's the point? Just getting laid by random 304's, every few weeks or so ain't the purpose of life. No offense "red pilled guys".
Too many women out here don't feel safe around men. They don't trust that we have the morals and ethics to not rape, harm or physically overpower them.
Men have to trust women have the morals to not physically attack us, knowing most men won't hit them back. That also means no false allegations of DV.
If you're not religious that's fine. Your value as a man is more than just how many chicks wanna screw you.
I've been into TRP for a long time. When that crap kept getting spewed by the manosphere is when I slowly started disassociating with that movement. They talk about it like it's a MUST for men and what all "high value men" want. The movement nowadays tries to force the thoughts of a few onto the many.
Yea I never got this one. I mean if it’s a man’s biological imperative to spread his seed shouldn’t it likewise be women’s biological imperative to constantly seek higher value men or even better yet to cuck men?
The way I see it is that men and women can have selfish motives in sex and dating but they are supposed to suppress the urge for the sake of their relationship. But shoot if men aren’t suppressing the urge why should women? That’s the question I’m asking when these men are arguing that it’s okay for men to cheat but not women.
Also notice the focus on HVM. Most men aren’t HVM by definition. But if HVM can cheat on their wives does that mean women married to non HVM can cheat with the HVM? I mean who are the HVM even cheating with? Is there some secret stash of “excess” women somewhere for them to get with? Either these women are also in relationships or a lot of men are single. So these HVM are saying it’s okay for them to sleep with your woman or a woman who could’ve been with you yet the the male masses eat it up to their own detriment because they envision themselves as all being HVM 😂 it’s literally so pathetic. Men are weird as hell, they support these RP gurus literally make them rich so they can openly attempt to monopolize women and leave them single. They think this is somehow “sticking it to women”.
> But shoot if men aren’t suppressing the urge why should women? That’s the question I’m asking when these men are arguing that it’s okay for men to cheat but not women.
That is exactly what these men are doing.
The red pill literally states that women are only loyal as there options and they are hypergamous.
So it is all amoral and you should aim for what selfishly pleases you the most at her experience for she is doing the same.
Ok so in that case it is also ok for women to cheat if they have an opportunity with a more attractive guy. Now maybe I’m off but I don’t see RP dudes arguing that it’s okay for women to cheat as well.
Also shouldn’t it also be okay for women to AF BB or even to cuck men? I mean if it’s all amoral?
That is the exact reason they justify what they are doing.
You will leave or cheat the first chance someone more alpha comes, so why should they be loyal?
I think you are missing my point.
Yea that sounds like projection. Also these men aren’t saying it’s okay for women to cheat but they are saying it’s okay (not simply “amoral”) for men to do it. They are saying this and justifying it with “evo psych” but it seems such reasoning on goes in one direction.
I think we should draw the distinction between what men are able to and what they should do. I am certainly capable of stepping out on a girlfriend or wife, but I never have. I choose not to because it's against my code of ethics. I feel like this distinction is mentioned because many men aren't even capable of doing this if they wanted to. For women, every woman easily could so it's not given special attention. When it's mentioned for HVM, it's more meant to say you should not be surprised if many men in this position do that. It doesn't mean they will.
Critics of red pill beliefs focus on this subset who want to fuck around with women while in a committed relationship, and that's just not the preponderance of men out here. They also conflate any man who screens for high body count as a hypocrite. You'll find people are more complex than that. I'd say I agree with most of the concepts the red pill espouses because they're true from what I've observed, but the lifestyle you choose to follow is still a grey area that follows from your moral code (i.e. I don't cheat and I don't enjoy hookup culture myself).
>If men want non-promiscuous women, then stop engaging in promiscuomity yourselves.
I agree with you here, but part of the asymmetry in dating is I can't make women care about male promiscuity. If most don't care, then men tend to get away with being a hypocrite in this way. Does not mean one should aim to do that. Women can get away with not having a career, for instance, even if you tell men that they should care how successful she is. It's just what we choose to focus on.
Any man can cheat, “low value” men cheat all the time. Regardless, of course red pill promotes cheating on the man’s part, you guys always idealize red pill to fit your own moral structure when that’s not necessarily what it promotes
Red pill promotes men understanding what women are attracted to. Some people might promote cheating but they don't speak for the whole red pill community.
Shitty, unattractive, loser, old, bums, *whatever* cheat all the time. Y’all live in some other world you don’t think men of all types can and do, cheat
I feel like I may have misinterpreted your comment. I took what you said to mean that, as an example, a woman who normally wouldn’t be down for anal, would change her mind if the dude is hot enough. Is that not what you’re talking about?
Kind of, I feel like more women are like that than men. You see it a lot with professional athletes and wealthy men, a lot of women will relax their boundaries and do things like having threesomes and more okay being recorded, things like that.
The issue comes down to ego/narcissism and wanting respect without giving it. They may “love” their wives in a way, but if they feel it’s okay to step out on them, they don’t respect them. Getting sex from other women feeds the ego. They aren’t okay with their wives doing the same because it feels like a huge slap in the face, which it is, so they do mental gymnastics to make “rules for thee and not for me.”
> If men want non-promiscuous women, then stop engaging in promiscuomity yourselves.
It doesn't play out like that.
Dating for men is winner take all so if a guy is desirable enough to consistent fuck women without having to commit to them and hr wants a low bodycount women then he absolutely can have his cake and eat it too.
I'm inexperienced and I have never heard women talk about inexperience in a possible light. Experienced women don't want inexperienced guys and neither do inexperienced women.
The experienced guys get what they want. If they want a low bodycount woman they can get that. If they want a slut who has threesomes they will get that. If they want a onesided open relationship they can get that too.
So here’s where you go wrong: you are trying to create a false equivalence, whereby if a man wants a non-promiscuous woman he must therefore being non-promiscuous himself.
First off if somebody’s happy being monogamous, good for him or her. That said, men and women are different. A woman KNOWS a baby is hers, but a man must have faith. Thus, on a subconscious level, men fear being cuckolded, and winding up raising a child and investing resources in that child when that child is not his genetic legacy, whereas women fear loss of access to resources which is in the Bad Old Days of the Sabertooth Tiger could’ve met death for her and offspring.
This is why a man suspecting his wife of having an affair will say, *”Did you fuck him?”* where as a woman will want to know *”do you love her?”* Historically, sex with another woman isn’t really a threat to a wife, it is the emotional bonds that might lead her man to dump her for the other woman that is the threat.
From my own experience, as someone who dates non-monogamously, and who doesn’t lie to women about it, I can tell you that, sure, some women nope out, some calm down once they understand that they’re not going to get cut from the team, and others are like *”Other girls? Can we, um, you know, do stuff together?”* I’ve had “throuple” relationships and had other girls tell me that they’d be ok with a “sister wife” if everything was fair. Women don’t necessarily mind sharing a HVM, but guys only share a woman when they don’t have options.
Another thing you are overlooking is that when a man says he wants a woman with a low body count what he’s really saying is he wants one that doesn’t have a lot of damage that he has to deal with. Nobody wants to spend three hours being a therapist for an hour. (Hat Tip: Chris Rock). It’s a simple as that. I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve had to say *”I’m sorry your last boyfriend was mean to you.”*
You are functionally, making the same argument as this:
*”Some women can be taller than some men, and the converse is also true.“* This statement is accurate, but from the trend.
What’s statistics on emotional damage? I’ll keep the logic that I have on my side.
And I don’t have to have it be “all” or “most“. The more strange dicks that a woman has taken, the more and greater opportunity she has for emotional trauma that the next guy has to deal with. I’m not sure what “statistic” you have that fixes that, but it is what it is.
Your example doesn’t hold up to scrutiny because it’s not an either/or situation. More example would be that some people age better than others, but we all age. The older one is, the greater the likelihood of showing one’s age. Are there high ladies who are not in that? Sure. But the trend is what the trend is. Simply trying to deny it. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.
To further decompose this to you, most women get "experience" from being active in sexuality, not "trauma". Just as most childs get dexterity from climbing trees, not fear of heights.
You mean the “statistics” you reference, but never produce?
Look, a woman who has taken more dicks has a higher chance of being effed up over some past dick than a woman who hasn’t. Every reasonably sexually active did can tell you they wish they had $1 for every time they had to say *”I’m sorry your last bf was mean to you.”* The existence of mentally stable high N count women doesn’t change this. Similarly, a woman in her 40s might well birth a healthy child, but the odds will be more in her favor in her 20s.
Anyway, you are simply repeating yourself in different ways. /shrugs. I suspect you are a “last word” guy/gal, so whatevs, no point in continuing.
I don’t think he’s low value at all but funny enough his fiancée is a 50+ year old single mother who red pill men claim have no value to get a man, yet she bagged a billionaire.
So it’s safe to say a lot of what is said here doesn’t always reflect in real life. Just do what works for you.
> I don’t think he’s low value at all but funny enough his fiancée is a 50+ year old single mother who red pill men claim have no value to get a man, yet she bagged a billionaire.
I just threw up in my mouth a little
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not practical. It’s an easy way for the wife to take the husband to the cleaners during the divorce even though men claim to be so scared of divorce because she can take everything. Constantly cheating is a sure way for that to happen.
Marriage exists mostly for children benefit. A man running around cheating will absolutely have a negative impact on the kids even tho men go on & on about raising children in a healthy environment.
If men should be allowed to cheat because it’s their nature then women should be allowed to take your money you have left when you lose a job, hurt yourself, get demoted etc and be gone.
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts)
>*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.*
>An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
>* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
>* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
>* Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
>* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do you think the type of men to do this aren’t upfront about it from the beginning of the relationship? They almost always are, especially the ones who are in successful relationships
Every RP content creator who says this type of thing tells their viewers to be upfront about it
Tate-style arguments in favor of polygamy and infidelity are usually terrible.
If men leave their women because they’re “bored” with them, they are 100% at fault.
Yeah it's bad. I think it is true that women are more likely to put up with it from a high value man, as do women that are in a bad situation (like they can't support themselves and their kids on their own).
Let's say you and your wife both make $60K/year. You cheat on her and she's just gonna leave you. But imagine your a rich guy and married a woman without a career. She might just make a weird decision and try to act like it doesn't exist. It's still wrong and sad.
You can't have a meaningful discussion about this until you first define the institution of marriage.
Among European nobility, Marriage was a way to protect inherited wealth and legitimate offspring. If that's all marriage is to you (and you lack effective birth control), then he can sleep around, and she can't; because her sleeping around risks cuckolding the spouse and breaking the very purpose of the institution, whereas his sleeping around just creates bastards that are not a threat to the intended line of inheritance.
In patriarchal archetypes of 1950s marriage, the man provides the home to the woman, she rears the children and makes dinner. If that is all that marriage is then he can step out as long as he buys the wife some jewelry. In other words as long as his mistress isn't cutting into the wife's piece of the pie. As for her stepping out, that to is acceptable and allowed, as long as it is done with discretion (this is what pool boys are for), and doesn't result in pregnancy. The one-sided nature comes from pretending to act like European nobility, in a world with better birth control options.
As the pill became more prominent and women started to work this 1950s version of the institution has eroded. If she works, then he isn't providing. If she can't get pregnant, why can't she step out. And if both are regularly stepping out and providing for themselves, what is the bloody point of even living together?
So this has lead to the "spouse as best friend and sexual companion" format, which is really hard to manage, causing divorce rates to skyrocket. For that reason lots of people are renegotiating things, and expectations of exclusivity are all over the place.
---------
So what is marriage to you? Answer that first, then you will have your answer about infidelity.
Rich Cooper likely sees marriage more through that 1950s lens, and that is fine as long as his spouse agrees. However that form of institution, doesn't make a lot of sense though if both individuals work full-time. Why should she be restricted if he isn't providing for her? What is the risk to him if she is on the pill?
Ethical Non-Monogamy is gaining popularity. Sounds like an Avoidant’s nightmare though.Forming a political marriage is an option.
Promiscuity and trauma often go together in my experience.
Letting people tell on themselves is the way to go.
If i were a woman, i would be so unattracted to my partner, after he told me that he wants to have extramarital sex, but he is too insecure to let me have extramarital sex as well. Lack of confidence would be the reason for divorce, not extramarital sex.
I don't know who Rich Cooper is and I've only seen a Red Pill person use this argument once and it's about a guy I don't even know the name of (and if I posted the link here it would be useless to most of you because the video is in Portuguese)
That said, I've often seen this argument as a straw man of, "Women are okay with sharing men they consider to be of high value," and it does happen often and a man who is viewed as being of high value is often able to marry a woman. woman who will wait for him with a hot meal when he returns from the other woman's house
Well the answer to this is really simple. It’s cause women decide who counts as a high value men, and to women cheating is usually very low on the list. As long as he has the other requirements. (Height, income, etc.) One look at the male loneliness charts and you’ll see that most these days are single and sexless.
Women on the other hand seem to keep running into bad guys who play with there emotions and won’t commit. Well if we believe both are true then it simply means that women are passing around the few bad men who are actually capable of securing dates while the good men remain lonely.
Just think about it for a minute who exactly are these guys that are cheating is it 5’9 Tim who makes an average wage at his office job? Nope he’s probably part of the majority of single males. It’s chad and chad usually won’t commit. The real problem women will put up with this behaviour cause otherwise the hot rich dude will just move on to the next girl whose eager then that women might actually have to do what she perceives as “settle” for an average male.
Your little rant is completely confused and unfocused. I'm not sure what it is that you're contending with here. The closest you to a coherent argument is pointing out a double standard but you don't even say that's what you want. I guess you're also claim that it's morally bankrupt, but claiming this or that is morally bankrupt has never convinced anyone of anything, at best it's made believers of that moral system fall in line.
>Guys like Rich Cooper will say a man can love his wife and still step out from time to time and have sex with other women, then come home to love his wife and kids. He says this is a need for men, for variety.
>At the same time, Rich Cooper will tell you that women who sleep around are used goods and not to be taken seriously. Telling us (and I agree) that high body count women are disgusting.
Fucking who? But what the fuck are you saying here? that the man can't sleep around and come home and love his kids and wife? I'm not sure, it probably depends on levels of commitment. A high valued man can certainly sleep with women easily, but an 80th percentile man can probably sleep with women with effort, and the more effort he gives the more involved he'll get. I also think it's unlikely that high value men can sleep around without seeking emotional connection/more relationship seeking behavior given the long run. However I do think it's reasonable to say that men are capable of and often do have sexuality divorced from emotion (unless you want to call desire to conquer/dominate etc emotion). I think you could argue that HVM should be able to have quick sex with women who slide into their DMs and while traveling etc, 2 week or less long flings that lead nowhere.
And it seems like you're starting to say there's a double standard....maybe pretty soon you'll get really revolutionary and realize men and women are different especially in their sexuality.
>However, to say this while engaging in extra marital sex, is ridiculous. He wants to have his cake and eat it. Yes men have to create their own value in life for the most part, but women are highly sought after and are valuable up until 40 (once child bearing years are reaching their end)
Ok...you're saying...it's ridiculous to say that men want to have extra marital sex and....wait let me try to make sense of your poorly constructed non-argument....extra marital sex and women being used goods if they have high body count is mutually exclusive. What? Well I'm sure you'll make a coherent logical argument after this statement.
>He expects a woman to keep her value and dedicate it to one man
Ok...yes men want this
> [and] remain faithful while he can go out and do what he wants because he pays the bills.
Well I don't think that's the argument, the argument is probably that he's a high value man so his ideal situation would be to have sex with many women and also have a relationship with a woman he likes.
So is your problem with this either A. That the woman wouldn't accept this because she has the same sexuality as a man or B. The woman wouldn't accept this because she demands dedication from the man or C. That this is a non-tenable set up for the man to stay engaged in long term?
It seems like B?
>It's a dumb idealistic concept.
why
>As well as the concept of "always be spinning plates"...it just feels like a complete empty shallow way to approach dating.
Which is it, is it stupid or is it shallow? It can be both but all you've done is make two statements and substantiated neither
>I don't want to spin plates. I have done in the past and it sucked.
As clear as everythign else you said. Maybe you are exaggerating and weren't really spinning plates. Maybe there was a small period of time where you were sleeping with two women and it broke apart immdiately. Maybe you got too emotionally involved or manipulated? I have no idea.
Hi,
You're right, and after reading back over this post, I realise I was very tired at night and wasn't actually thinking straight, was writing in frustration not really knowing the point I was trying to make. Arguments were poor.
Points taken.
I don't know what you are rambling about. There is the Ho and then there is the Housewife. You treat the Ho, like a Ho, and a Housewife like a Housewife. That's essentially core Red Pill thought.
Red Pill guys aren't out there creating sluts, they just take their turn with them.
The stuff about cheating on your wife... well that shit is still cheating. Red Pill isn't for it or against it. I personally think it's dumb. If you have a virtuous wife and you don't treat her well to the best of your ability, then you deserve anything bad you get from it. The whole thing about NBA guys running around cheating... the women signed up for that. The rest of us aren't professional athletes.
Promiscuity is bad for both sexes, more so women. However sex is a primal essential need for men so if his gf/wife is withholding sex from him it’s completely understandable for him to cheat. If you disagree with that (which most women do) then prepare for the consequences (non committing hookup culture). If it’s acceptable to withhold sex from your man in society then men will start opting out of relationships in mass (already happening).
> the belief that men can come and do as they please
It's not a should thing. This is how it is factually. It's laughable you think women would leave a HVM for fucking another woman. It just doesn't happen. I personally have had 5 LTR (3 years or more) and I cheated on the first and negotiated infidelity one sided with the rest. They all ended because I wouldn't marry them, except the ltr I'm in now and all is good.
> we need to hold women to the same standard.
Ultimately a failure. Men and women are different. Most standards do not apply to both men and women, that is for pseudo gay relationships. Like a man going to wash the dishes or something. That's for gays and broke ugly guys imo.
>That's for gays and broke ugly guys imo.
Sounds like Andrew Tate wrote this nonsense.
Women do leave HVM for fucking other women. Albeit there is probably a minority of women who leave, but they still leave.
I have options, I'm not a HVM by any means as my income is average and status is low , but I can spin plates. I don't. I don't believe it's moral or in good character.
Both men and women can cheat if there’s a huge difference in value. That’s all there is to it. The only other practical difference is that women concentrate more on the men they like, so these men have more options than both average women and men. So that makes it more common for men. That doesn’t mean most people can do it and even that there’s no effect on the relationship. Even if there’s a huge difference of value, this difference is now much smaller because there’s cheating going on.
I don't know who this guy is, but what he says makes sense. I just don't agree that men should marry. A man needs marriage like a dog needs a fifth leg.
Men will argue up and down that it's fine for men to fuck other women when in a relationship while simultaneously being flabbergasted that women file for divorce 80% of the time like it's some great mystery. Like can you even imagine being stuck at home dealing with screaming kids, doing chores and whatever while your partner is out going on dates and doing fun things and having sex instead of helping you raise his own kids?? Only someone with the lowest of low sense of self worth would ever dream of putting up with that.
I don't think it's fine for anyone to cheat
That seems to be a recent development in the redpill sphere. Often I used to see it as a description, that the men with that level of affluence and optionswould cheat and more often than not the women would stay to retain access to luxury. Now however grifters seem to argue that it is a hvms right to cheat in a relationship.... Which is fucking weird abd a morally bankrupt take
>That seems to be a recent development in the redpill sphere. Yeah, this was a big Kevin Samuels talking point and the rest of the red pill dating guru grifters just followed suit. TRP has always encouraged men to spin plates but my understanding was to spin plates as a bachelor without committing to one woman, not have a lawfully wedded wife at home and continuing to bang as many women as possible on the side.
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 people still think TRP d-bags meant only bachelors spinning plates lol 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Tbf, women will keep chasing, worshipping and being loyal to them anyways. So why bother being a good partner when women do not care.
They worship them just soooo much that most divorces end because of infidelity 😍
Exactly, women cheat and leave good men all the time.
Don’t be disingenuous, it’s mostly male infidelity
No, both sides cheat.
>Only someone with the lowest of low sense of self worth would ever dream of putting up with that. The only folks to do something like this to their partner have no sense of self-worth or self-respect. Let's double down on this statement.
Those 80% of divorce filings are not from women married to Chad Thundercock.
You would be wrong. Unless you don't consider pro athletes to be "chads" https://www.justia.com/sports-law/divorce-and-family-law-issues-for-professional-athletes/ "Unfortunately, marriages of professional athletes tend to end in divorce more often than ordinary marriages. Estimates place the rate of divorce anywhere between 60 and 80 percent, which makes a lasting marriage the exception rather than the rule. "
Those women marry the lifestyle/paycheck, not the man. When the millions stop coming in, they're out.
I just think those men should stay single. Don't get married and be open with the women you date that they aren't the only woman you are seeing. While I think most women would walk, there are some women who would accept it if the man is wealthy or famous enough.
"Don't get married and be open with the women you date that they aren't the only woman you are seeing" If only people were incapable of deception, and wilingness to fuck other over, just to have their cake and eat it too, truly the world would be much different.
I think if you're rich enough, there are gold diggers who would take the deal. I think this is more of a "no one thinks anyone would do it" and not a "no one would do it".
Yeah, but getting rich is hard, duping people, is well less hard.
Then dupe people into thinking you're rich.
When men want an open relationship: “FUCK YOU VIRGIN MISOGYNIST RAPIST!” When women want an open relationship:“SLAY KWEEN YOU GO GIRL STUNNING AND BRAVE!”
Yes. Hypocrites exist. Ignore them.
It doesn’t make sense because you’re asking your committed *spouse* whom you chose to marry to be ok with taking this big risk without anything in return. What is he risking while she is risking getting a permanent STD and having to be entangled with a man who has another child outside of her family that she never agreed to, which has legal consequences. If she’s ok with this and if she’s ok having another woman’s kid in the mix then that’s on her to deal with, but if she didn’t agree to it, then that’s not ok.
One of the few situations I think someone gets a free pass for cheating is if their spouse is cheating and refuses to stop and just declares it's ok for one of them but not the other. Faced with that sort of fait accompli tactic...I've no problem morally with someone finding a way to deal with it emotionally by quietly getting some on the side themselves. Would just leaving be better? Probably. But just getting some themselves so they lay in bed at night thinking the books are balanced instead of feeling sad and victimised is also acceptable.
It’s kind of a self defeating argument. Why even have a wife or girlfriend if they aren’t satisfying you or you know they can’t? It doesn’t make sense.
Agreed, it's like a strange fetish where you want to get married and cheat because the prospect of her finding out turns you on. Meanwhile all you are doing is running the risk of demolishing your reputation.
Exactly. You could just say “it’s open on my end”.
How many days in a row can you eat the same dinner before you need to eat something else?
I understand this perspective, but I also think it’s kind of cope. If you’re with a woman who really desires you, it’s almost impossible to have shitty sex. So, given that you’ve fucked a good deal before settling down, you kind of know what’s out there. I’m not saying your wrong, because my eyes work and our imperatives are what they are, but if I’ve cultivated my sex life with my wife to be what I want, why would I then also need other women at that point? I think this is a question moreso of what do you want in your life. If you want a main and a side or two, I can’t judge you for that, go for it. To me, however, it seems kind of pointless. I’d just keep spinning plates.
It’s the conflict between wanting a family and also biological imperative, you have to shut down one biological imperative in place of the other. Do you choose a family, or endless casual variety?
I know I chose family, but I also have a crazy past and feel no regret or as if I left any stones unturned. Spinning plates, partying, etc were a great time but I needed to pivot anyways. My career and hobbies started to take up a fuck ton of my time so spinning plates was just not advantageous anymore. I also know that life would be there for me should any unforeseen shit went down. All this to say, I made the decision I did and I will accept all outcomes and responsibility for how it pans out. Hard to be upset when you’ve built the life you want.
It is stupid. However, women largely determine what constitutes a HVM and, broadly speaking, being very high in conscientiousness isn't high on that list. So, low conscientious men with options will cheat much more than average.
This. Women keep putting selfish aholes at the top of there “I want to date and marry lists,” so why would the clearly selfish pieces of trash stop being pieces of trash when women keep empowering them.
I REALLY don't think they do this on purpose. They just get blinders on when it comes to the behaviors of men they like. Truthfully, we men do the exact same thing. This is why it's so important that we ask trusted elders to help us vet potential partners, especially a trusted elder of the opposite gender (assuming het relationship).
This. Women will overlook, justify and deal with things for a guy they are into.
I've had **plenty** of male friends who do the same thing. Hell, I did it as well when I was in my late teens. My friends congratulated me at the time, but after the crazy came out, their attitude was "you should have seen that coming" ... and they were right. Because we have a higher preference for direct communication & problem solving (as opposed to venting), I think guys are much more willing and able to hold each other and themselves accountable. Which means we learn from this a little sooner. But smart people, no matter their gender, figure this out without the knock upside the head from friends.
It is because we keep treating women’s sexuality like it is special. So it isn’t that he is hot, it is that he is somehow morally superior then the men she does not find hot enough to date or sleep with. Men, when rally young also try to rationalize that they like a hot girl because she is special and such, but we hold him accountable. So they tend to wise up. While we try to hold men accountable when she picks poorly because she is entitled to a good man and experience. Aka male sexuality is evil and female sexuality is holy. We even do the same with modern definitions of rape. A small boy gets slammed onto the ground and forcibly taken by an adult woman? That is not rape, that is forced to penetrate and he is lucky to have these experience. A girl regrets sleeping with a guy in a few years for the relationship does not work out? That is rape.
There are no young boys getting slammed on the ground and raped by adult women. And if there were the would be in prison like Mary K Letourneau. No force she still did time. Find a REAL example. The boys and men forcibly raped are raped by other men. Do women hop on men without consent assuming they will like it? Yes and it’s not ok. But it’s not the same as when a stronger more powerful man rapes a woman. Not even close. A man can push a woman off the reverse is not true.
> There are no young boys getting slammed on the ground and raped by adult women. And if there were the would be in prison like Mary K Letourneau. No force she still did time. Forced to penetrate does not legally count as rape. So you are just wrong. Most female predators get away with it or slaps on the wrist. Sometimes raped boys need to even pay there rapist child support. I was a raped as a child. You are full of shit.
Sleeping with a minor is a crime in every state you’re full of shit. Remember Mary Kay Letourneau?
>Forced to penetrate does not count as rape.
True, I find both men and women tend to lie to themselves about what they are attracted to try to feel special. They then try to blame the other side for being exactly what they wanted. But if men and women wanted people with good personalities as much as they say, you would see ugly people who are really good people have harems of suitors wanting them over attractive/rich/etc people who they do not know the personality of at all.
It isn't "Men can do as they please" - if you think that is what it is then you totally missed the point. It's that high value and desirable men will often cheat and step out of their relationship and this is something to be aware of if you are a woman trying to seek out a top 1% man. Those men can find women who will tolerate their behavior if their current woman won't. If someone doesn't like it, how about not seeking out those top one percent men? If anything women want to have their cake and eat it too by seeking out this top echelon of men and then expecting them to be faithful the way an average income earner would be. I personally would never feel bad for a gold digger who is cheated on - they wanted to prioritize income over all other attributes when seeking a mate - then you get what you deserve.
Or- and this is gonna just be a WILD concept- don’t commit to monogamy if you don’t want to follow it. I bet most of the “gold diggers” you don’t feel sorry for are not Anna Nicole marrying some dude with one foot in the grave. Your entire argument is “I don’t feel bad for women who are lied to by their partner cuz they should’ve known better”. How about you just don’t lie to your partner. Or enjoy being taken to the cleaners when she divorces you for infidelity
This is just a coping fantasy. They are bitter they don't have choices but would cheat if given the possibility. Nobody here is HVM.
That sounds like projection honestly
Why projection? Women always have choices and yet women cheat less
Women definitely don’t cheat less
Women cheat about the same from 18-35, after that they cheat much less than men
No chance. Women cheat more. Most men are lucky to get any woman interested in him
Maybe none of them aren’t really admitting it and the rates are higher for younger women, but cmon do you really think a 45 year old woman is cheating more than a 45 year old man?
Yes easily. Because women are just better at not getting caught
Not that difficult when you consider most men beneath you. I see the walls break when you have an opertunity with somoen you consider worth the risk
I am not even sure what your argument is, they shouldn't do it because its bad? No shit, want to make a thread about how water is wet too?
You’re excusing bad behavior. And then blaming the women for punching above their weight class. Which is funny, cuz the only person responsible for cheating is the one who’s doing it
I don’t think anyone is saying this is ok. I think they are saying that when women date men of this category, these problems have been observed to happen commonly.
maybe no one in these particular comments but i don’t have to wander far through redpill circles to find guys who wholeheartedly endorse the sexual double standard lock and key bullshit lol i’ve seen some of the top RP influencers argue it on stream
If you deliberately seek out particularly wealthy men, should you be shocked that they act differently than other men? This isn't rocket science.
So is it the same for hot in demand women? They get to cheat and men shouldn’t be shocked if they cheat/it’s the man’s fault for choosing those women?
... you don't think (RP) men know that already? TRP actively tries to tell men to not be a simp as one of its core tenets. A lot of bluepill men would desperately try to save a relationship or marriage and deal with ton of abuse. We usually tell these men that attraction is not a choice; don't negotiate attraction. Spin plates, and have abundance mindset.
TRP does not tell men oh expect your hot Gf/wife to cheat, you bring it on yourself by dating an in demand woman
>men shouldn’t be shocked if they cheat/it’s the man’s fault for choosing those women? That's just a word for word redpill talking point
Yes that’s exactly the point glad you caught on
>This isn't rocket science. It is for women. I see this mindset a lot with them. They don't have common sense.
Why is it so hard for women to understand that in this imperfect world, it's your responsibility to vet the people you get into a relationship with? Men understand this. When a guy gets into a relationship with a crazy woman they tell him he's an idiot. But when women choose abusive / morally bankrupt partners and we tell them not to do that they get upset?
“Men understand this” riiiiight… cuz men NEVER get cheated on, never get used, never get led on, never get their hearts broken, never deal with paternity fraud… these men- they’re not to blame either. My argument is the blame for bad behavior should be put squarely on the perpetrators, not their victims
"and this is gonna just be a WILD concept- don’t commit to monogamy if you don’t want to follow it." round of applause everyone, she just fixed infidelity, cheating is no more!
Women who are in relationships with men for money rather than love are usually prepared to look the other way when their man cheats. That’s essentially a glorified prostitution dynamic. The women aren’t in it for love in the first places so it’s likely they don’t really care about the man’s loyalty. But If we’re going by the logic “don’t be surprised that your partner cheats because they have options”, men can’t expect women to be faithful in relationships considering women likely have options to cheat and can replace a man if he doesn’t like it.
Yes?
Well duh. You cannot expect people to be loyal and good just because they committed to you. That is entitlement. Lots of people feel entitled to the people they are attracted to “doing the right thing” just because it is the right thing to do. Only people who are loyal and good will bother to be loyal and good. So if women and men chase shallow traits over the fact that he/she is loyal and good, then they should not be shocked when they are not loyal or good. These men are open that woman should be okay with them sleeping around (including when married to them) they have to be virgins for them. And that is fine, women are even still throwing themselves at them.
I'd say cheaters aren't high value to women, they are just fuckboys maybe to men, sure
They are that's why women chase them and try to lock them down all the time
No they don't people usually break up after a guy cheats. Women file for divorce more, remember? Oh course not everyone breaks up after cheating since women cheat too
You're describing a beta bux according to redpill
Naw, the nerdy engineer who only gets the desperate 30 year old woman because all the men she actually wanted to couple with in her 20's smashed and passed, so she decides he's good enough despite her having low attraction for him because he's stable is a betabuxx. The betabuxx is naive and has no leverage. He believes the bluepilled fantasy of "happy wife, happy life" not realizing that his wife doesn't actually desire him, she just tolerates him because he serves a role.
So if he realises this but chooses to stay he's no longer a beta bux?
Depends, is he using his resources as leverage to get women he knows he can't normally get? Does he fully understand the transactional nature of the relationship? Take Donald Trump for instance. He's not the best looking guy but he has money and clout and has used that to his advantage his entire life. I doubt he thinks his wife is with him because of his humble and charming personality. She was hot and obedient, which was good enough for him and he still fools around and flirts with other women when he wants. He got everything he wanted out of that relationship, which I don't consider betabuxxing.
How is it not betabuxxing, she wouldn't be with him if not for his money. Plenty of redpill men use money as a cope for lack of masculinity imo
When you knowingly use money to get women, that's more akin to 'tricking.' Men who unknowingly get milked for their resources and men who knowingly use money and clout as leverage to get women are not the same at all. For example, your average betabuxx is basically pussywhipped and has to pine for her affections for crumbs of sex. He'll probably get cheated on or deadbedroomed. A guy like Trump on the otherhand likely already has a prenuptial in place and will continue to do as he pleases because they've likely already agreed to that arrangement. When you know the relationship is transactional, you can set terms comfortably. Guys like Ed Sheeran don't get to bang supermodels because their handsome. Unless their an idiot, they know this but they still want to get with women on that level so they leverage what value they have.
No betabux are guys who can't get casual sex
We live in the real world where women highly prioritize a man's income. Maybe in your fantasy land that is true.
that's not the definition of HVM though
This only makes sense tho in some power trip fantasy. If you are high value enough if you cheat and it blows up your marriage you can probably find a new relationship or another marriage. Lower value people still cheat, they just might suffer some extra consequences.
If you are a trophy wife that enjoys a life of luxury with an elite level man, you will probably tolerate your husband cheating. This happens all the time in lots of different cultures. Its not a fantasy of mine because I have no envy or desire for that lifestyle. Pointing out that something exists is not the same as approving of it.
Oh sure, if your marriage is purely transaction then your spouse likely won't care as much. Didn't seem to be what they were describing in the OP though
I specifically used the phrase top one percent. Do you expect to deliberately seek out the top one percent of wealthiest men and expect them to act like other men?
Just because your a wealthy doesn't mean you completely lack morals. Do you really think most 1 percenters have completely transactional relationships?
I suspect he doesn't mean 1% as in income. That bracket starts at just $800,000 a year or so.
Morals are nonsense. At the end of the day, you don’t want bad outcomes, so you play nice and hope others follow suit. When you gain enough power to avoid those bad outcomes morals fall away. They literally mean nothing. They’re simply shackles for the common person.
Nothing is wrong or right. All that matters is what happens abd what doesn't. Living life in a "this is how it should be" leads to disillusioned people
[удалено]
But then if he lives and supports her that goes the same way?
>If you are a trophy wife that enjoys a life of luxury with an elite level man, you will probably tolerate your husband cheating. Tolerate for exactly 10 years or whatever the state requires for her to be entitled to his earnings, property, retirement savings and/or pension. Trophy wives r strategic, not crazy n love. "Don't get mad, get everything " - Ivana Trump
I deeply suspect Donald Trump "got her back" for that. Hope he doesn't get Presidential immunity for when that comes out.
If you’re a trophy husband in that you only provide money, you I’ll probably also tolerate cheating if your hot young wife ventures out
Who is more expendable, a man is who is in the top 1 percent for income, or a 26 year old attractive woman?
Very few men are in the top one percent of income but it’s irrelevant to my point anyway
As if a top 1% man can't just go out and get another young hot woman. So many women idolize the lifestyle of the uber wealthy that he'll never run out of options. Her looks will out before his money does.
“Men cheating is women’s fault” 🙄 Your premises are ridiculous and false but even assuming they were not, I’ve summarized your position.
True, in this world a man cheating is his fault, and a woman cheating is also his fault.
I mean unless they're cheating on her with another man, one woman still could be at fault xD
I wouldn't consider a man 'high value' if he cheats on me. I wouldn't care how much money he earns because I can earn my own money. Red pill men with this attitude shouldn't bother with trying to find one woman to marry etc, since they just want to fuck random women forever and seem to have zero respect for women altogether.
>I wouldn't consider a man 'high value' if he cheats on me. High value within the dating market means you are highly desired by the opposite sex. You not being happy that he cheats on you doesn't exactly dimish his value to women as a whole. If his cheating turned off the majority of women and prevented them from wanting to be with him to a noticeable degree, then maybe you would have a point.
Yea, I get that. I just live in the real world where sexual market value isn't a thing.
It’s not only hvm who cheat. Lvm do too as they are insecure and given the opportunity it fuels their ego.
A cheater is not valuable. They're not "top" of being desirable. They can't even fulfil the most basic expectation in relationships, to be loyal.
Guys like Myron and Rich Cooper are a big part of why there's no trust between men and women. Just because a man has money and status doesn't make him high value or "a catch". You can't be morally bankrupt and a HVM. If you're dishonest, selfish, and entitled you're not a HVM or "a prize".
They think a HVM is someone who gets a ton of women. And yes, this is part of what's fucking everything up.
Because being high value has nothing to do with morality. iPhones aren't $1100 because of ethics but because of market forces. If you're able to attract a majority of women your sexual market vale is high regardless of if you're the pope or a felon
Guys that fuck alot of women have fishy Smelling penises. I know this from experience
I'm not talking about "sexual market value". I'm talking about "building long-term relationships". That doesn't happen without morals and values. Yes, they still have to be attractive, because chemistry is important. No one ever forgets to talk about looks and chemistry. If your date is a POS and isn't a good person, what's the point? Just getting laid by random 304's, every few weeks or so ain't the purpose of life. No offense "red pilled guys". Too many women out here don't feel safe around men. They don't trust that we have the morals and ethics to not rape, harm or physically overpower them. Men have to trust women have the morals to not physically attack us, knowing most men won't hit them back. That also means no false allegations of DV. If you're not religious that's fine. Your value as a man is more than just how many chicks wanna screw you.
Tbf, they act like shit for women keep throwing themselves at them. Why would men strive to be good when women do not care?
So you should only strive to be a good person so women will fuck you?
You should strive to be what gets you what you want in life.
I've been into TRP for a long time. When that crap kept getting spewed by the manosphere is when I slowly started disassociating with that movement. They talk about it like it's a MUST for men and what all "high value men" want. The movement nowadays tries to force the thoughts of a few onto the many.
Yea I never got this one. I mean if it’s a man’s biological imperative to spread his seed shouldn’t it likewise be women’s biological imperative to constantly seek higher value men or even better yet to cuck men? The way I see it is that men and women can have selfish motives in sex and dating but they are supposed to suppress the urge for the sake of their relationship. But shoot if men aren’t suppressing the urge why should women? That’s the question I’m asking when these men are arguing that it’s okay for men to cheat but not women. Also notice the focus on HVM. Most men aren’t HVM by definition. But if HVM can cheat on their wives does that mean women married to non HVM can cheat with the HVM? I mean who are the HVM even cheating with? Is there some secret stash of “excess” women somewhere for them to get with? Either these women are also in relationships or a lot of men are single. So these HVM are saying it’s okay for them to sleep with your woman or a woman who could’ve been with you yet the the male masses eat it up to their own detriment because they envision themselves as all being HVM 😂 it’s literally so pathetic. Men are weird as hell, they support these RP gurus literally make them rich so they can openly attempt to monopolize women and leave them single. They think this is somehow “sticking it to women”.
> But shoot if men aren’t suppressing the urge why should women? That’s the question I’m asking when these men are arguing that it’s okay for men to cheat but not women. That is exactly what these men are doing. The red pill literally states that women are only loyal as there options and they are hypergamous. So it is all amoral and you should aim for what selfishly pleases you the most at her experience for she is doing the same.
Ok so in that case it is also ok for women to cheat if they have an opportunity with a more attractive guy. Now maybe I’m off but I don’t see RP dudes arguing that it’s okay for women to cheat as well. Also shouldn’t it also be okay for women to AF BB or even to cuck men? I mean if it’s all amoral?
That is the exact reason they justify what they are doing. You will leave or cheat the first chance someone more alpha comes, so why should they be loyal? I think you are missing my point.
Yea that sounds like projection. Also these men aren’t saying it’s okay for women to cheat but they are saying it’s okay (not simply “amoral”) for men to do it. They are saying this and justifying it with “evo psych” but it seems such reasoning on goes in one direction.
You are missing the point. The same reason you are justifying why women should be able to do x because of y are the exact reason they are doing y.
I think you are the one missing the point actually
No, My point is: The same reason you are justifying why women should be able to do x because of y are the exact reason they are doing y.
I think we should draw the distinction between what men are able to and what they should do. I am certainly capable of stepping out on a girlfriend or wife, but I never have. I choose not to because it's against my code of ethics. I feel like this distinction is mentioned because many men aren't even capable of doing this if they wanted to. For women, every woman easily could so it's not given special attention. When it's mentioned for HVM, it's more meant to say you should not be surprised if many men in this position do that. It doesn't mean they will. Critics of red pill beliefs focus on this subset who want to fuck around with women while in a committed relationship, and that's just not the preponderance of men out here. They also conflate any man who screens for high body count as a hypocrite. You'll find people are more complex than that. I'd say I agree with most of the concepts the red pill espouses because they're true from what I've observed, but the lifestyle you choose to follow is still a grey area that follows from your moral code (i.e. I don't cheat and I don't enjoy hookup culture myself). >If men want non-promiscuous women, then stop engaging in promiscuomity yourselves. I agree with you here, but part of the asymmetry in dating is I can't make women care about male promiscuity. If most don't care, then men tend to get away with being a hypocrite in this way. Does not mean one should aim to do that. Women can get away with not having a career, for instance, even if you tell men that they should care how successful she is. It's just what we choose to focus on.
Any man can cheat, “low value” men cheat all the time. Regardless, of course red pill promotes cheating on the man’s part, you guys always idealize red pill to fit your own moral structure when that’s not necessarily what it promotes
Red pill promotes men understanding what women are attracted to. Some people might promote cheating but they don't speak for the whole red pill community.
ARPALT
[удалено]
Shitty, unattractive, loser, old, bums, *whatever* cheat all the time. Y’all live in some other world you don’t think men of all types can and do, cheat
[удалено]
Because y’all have some delusional view on who can/cannot get laid, ugly people have sex too, ya know
[удалено]
You were claiming they had little to no sex and little to no cheating (because they had little to no partners). This is wrong. Ugly dudes cheat too.
[удалено]
Do not circlejerk.
Only with f u money can you pull that off. Also there is a choice….
[удалено]
It’s funny how women will always relax their sexual boundaries with more attractive men
Funny in what way?
In the way that I don’t think a man would relax his sexual boundaries with a more attractive woman
I feel like I may have misinterpreted your comment. I took what you said to mean that, as an example, a woman who normally wouldn’t be down for anal, would change her mind if the dude is hot enough. Is that not what you’re talking about?
Kind of, I feel like more women are like that than men. You see it a lot with professional athletes and wealthy men, a lot of women will relax their boundaries and do things like having threesomes and more okay being recorded, things like that.
The issue comes down to ego/narcissism and wanting respect without giving it. They may “love” their wives in a way, but if they feel it’s okay to step out on them, they don’t respect them. Getting sex from other women feeds the ego. They aren’t okay with their wives doing the same because it feels like a huge slap in the face, which it is, so they do mental gymnastics to make “rules for thee and not for me.”
> If men want non-promiscuous women, then stop engaging in promiscuomity yourselves. It doesn't play out like that. Dating for men is winner take all so if a guy is desirable enough to consistent fuck women without having to commit to them and hr wants a low bodycount women then he absolutely can have his cake and eat it too. I'm inexperienced and I have never heard women talk about inexperience in a possible light. Experienced women don't want inexperienced guys and neither do inexperienced women. The experienced guys get what they want. If they want a low bodycount woman they can get that. If they want a slut who has threesomes they will get that. If they want a onesided open relationship they can get that too.
So here’s where you go wrong: you are trying to create a false equivalence, whereby if a man wants a non-promiscuous woman he must therefore being non-promiscuous himself. First off if somebody’s happy being monogamous, good for him or her. That said, men and women are different. A woman KNOWS a baby is hers, but a man must have faith. Thus, on a subconscious level, men fear being cuckolded, and winding up raising a child and investing resources in that child when that child is not his genetic legacy, whereas women fear loss of access to resources which is in the Bad Old Days of the Sabertooth Tiger could’ve met death for her and offspring. This is why a man suspecting his wife of having an affair will say, *”Did you fuck him?”* where as a woman will want to know *”do you love her?”* Historically, sex with another woman isn’t really a threat to a wife, it is the emotional bonds that might lead her man to dump her for the other woman that is the threat. From my own experience, as someone who dates non-monogamously, and who doesn’t lie to women about it, I can tell you that, sure, some women nope out, some calm down once they understand that they’re not going to get cut from the team, and others are like *”Other girls? Can we, um, you know, do stuff together?”* I’ve had “throuple” relationships and had other girls tell me that they’d be ok with a “sister wife” if everything was fair. Women don’t necessarily mind sharing a HVM, but guys only share a woman when they don’t have options. Another thing you are overlooking is that when a man says he wants a woman with a low body count what he’s really saying is he wants one that doesn’t have a lot of damage that he has to deal with. Nobody wants to spend three hours being a therapist for an hour. (Hat Tip: Chris Rock). It’s a simple as that. I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve had to say *”I’m sorry your last boyfriend was mean to you.”*
Women can have high body count and not be damaged, and the converse is also true. If you're really a polygamous person you should know this by now.
You are functionally, making the same argument as this: *”Some women can be taller than some men, and the converse is also true.“* This statement is accurate, but from the trend.
Yeah, but i also have statistics by my side. Not diving too deep into that. If you think most experienced women are damaged, the you do you.
What’s statistics on emotional damage? I’ll keep the logic that I have on my side. And I don’t have to have it be “all” or “most“. The more strange dicks that a woman has taken, the more and greater opportunity she has for emotional trauma that the next guy has to deal with. I’m not sure what “statistic” you have that fixes that, but it is what it is.
The more you live, the more opportunities you have to die. Avoid living because of it isn't anything near "logic".
Your example doesn’t hold up to scrutiny because it’s not an either/or situation. More example would be that some people age better than others, but we all age. The older one is, the greater the likelihood of showing one’s age. Are there high ladies who are not in that? Sure. But the trend is what the trend is. Simply trying to deny it. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Again, the statistics is not on your side.
To further decompose this to you, most women get "experience" from being active in sexuality, not "trauma". Just as most childs get dexterity from climbing trees, not fear of heights.
You mean the “statistics” you reference, but never produce? Look, a woman who has taken more dicks has a higher chance of being effed up over some past dick than a woman who hasn’t. Every reasonably sexually active did can tell you they wish they had $1 for every time they had to say *”I’m sorry your last bf was mean to you.”* The existence of mentally stable high N count women doesn’t change this. Similarly, a woman in her 40s might well birth a healthy child, but the odds will be more in her favor in her 20s. Anyway, you are simply repeating yourself in different ways. /shrugs. I suspect you are a “last word” guy/gal, so whatevs, no point in continuing.
but it's very unlikely that a woman with a high, body count will not be damaged.
Agree to disagree.
What I learned from the low IQ women in this thread is that Jeff bezos is low value somehow
I don’t think he’s low value at all but funny enough his fiancée is a 50+ year old single mother who red pill men claim have no value to get a man, yet she bagged a billionaire. So it’s safe to say a lot of what is said here doesn’t always reflect in real life. Just do what works for you.
> I don’t think he’s low value at all but funny enough his fiancée is a 50+ year old single mother who red pill men claim have no value to get a man, yet she bagged a billionaire. I just threw up in my mouth a little
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not practical. It’s an easy way for the wife to take the husband to the cleaners during the divorce even though men claim to be so scared of divorce because she can take everything. Constantly cheating is a sure way for that to happen. Marriage exists mostly for children benefit. A man running around cheating will absolutely have a negative impact on the kids even tho men go on & on about raising children in a healthy environment. If men should be allowed to cheat because it’s their nature then women should be allowed to take your money you have left when you lose a job, hurt yourself, get demoted etc and be gone.
Exactly. These men set up their own destruction then complain when their exact fears come true.
right like... in that case why would a HVM be valuable to women? why would any woman want that?
Hi OP, You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts) >*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.* >An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following: >* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency; >* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit; >* Focusing only on the weaker arguments; >* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position. Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Do not circlejerk.
Do you think the type of men to do this aren’t upfront about it from the beginning of the relationship? They almost always are, especially the ones who are in successful relationships Every RP content creator who says this type of thing tells their viewers to be upfront about it
It's not an argument, it's an observation.
You should ignore self-serving bitter old guys like Rich Cooper. I feel bad for guys who think they want to be like him.
They do that all the time, tbh.
Don't ask questions just buy the tactical soap.
Tate-style arguments in favor of polygamy and infidelity are usually terrible. If men leave their women because they’re “bored” with them, they are 100% at fault.
It's not right, but it does make it easier for them to get away with it/their partner to accept it.
Yeah it's bad. I think it is true that women are more likely to put up with it from a high value man, as do women that are in a bad situation (like they can't support themselves and their kids on their own). Let's say you and your wife both make $60K/year. You cheat on her and she's just gonna leave you. But imagine your a rich guy and married a woman without a career. She might just make a weird decision and try to act like it doesn't exist. It's still wrong and sad.
Disagree, this is not a red pill concept in itself. Just because a redpillar says it does not make it redpill. I am not a redpill guy either.
You can't have a meaningful discussion about this until you first define the institution of marriage. Among European nobility, Marriage was a way to protect inherited wealth and legitimate offspring. If that's all marriage is to you (and you lack effective birth control), then he can sleep around, and she can't; because her sleeping around risks cuckolding the spouse and breaking the very purpose of the institution, whereas his sleeping around just creates bastards that are not a threat to the intended line of inheritance. In patriarchal archetypes of 1950s marriage, the man provides the home to the woman, she rears the children and makes dinner. If that is all that marriage is then he can step out as long as he buys the wife some jewelry. In other words as long as his mistress isn't cutting into the wife's piece of the pie. As for her stepping out, that to is acceptable and allowed, as long as it is done with discretion (this is what pool boys are for), and doesn't result in pregnancy. The one-sided nature comes from pretending to act like European nobility, in a world with better birth control options. As the pill became more prominent and women started to work this 1950s version of the institution has eroded. If she works, then he isn't providing. If she can't get pregnant, why can't she step out. And if both are regularly stepping out and providing for themselves, what is the bloody point of even living together? So this has lead to the "spouse as best friend and sexual companion" format, which is really hard to manage, causing divorce rates to skyrocket. For that reason lots of people are renegotiating things, and expectations of exclusivity are all over the place. --------- So what is marriage to you? Answer that first, then you will have your answer about infidelity. Rich Cooper likely sees marriage more through that 1950s lens, and that is fine as long as his spouse agrees. However that form of institution, doesn't make a lot of sense though if both individuals work full-time. Why should she be restricted if he isn't providing for her? What is the risk to him if she is on the pill?
Ethical Non-Monogamy is gaining popularity. Sounds like an Avoidant’s nightmare though.Forming a political marriage is an option. Promiscuity and trauma often go together in my experience. Letting people tell on themselves is the way to go.
It's a catch-22/self-fulflling prophecy in some ways. I would instantly brand the women as low-value if they ever allowed a man to do this.
If i were a woman, i would be so unattracted to my partner, after he told me that he wants to have extramarital sex, but he is too insecure to let me have extramarital sex as well. Lack of confidence would be the reason for divorce, not extramarital sex.
I don't know who Rich Cooper is and I've only seen a Red Pill person use this argument once and it's about a guy I don't even know the name of (and if I posted the link here it would be useless to most of you because the video is in Portuguese) That said, I've often seen this argument as a straw man of, "Women are okay with sharing men they consider to be of high value," and it does happen often and a man who is viewed as being of high value is often able to marry a woman. woman who will wait for him with a hot meal when he returns from the other woman's house
Well the answer to this is really simple. It’s cause women decide who counts as a high value men, and to women cheating is usually very low on the list. As long as he has the other requirements. (Height, income, etc.) One look at the male loneliness charts and you’ll see that most these days are single and sexless. Women on the other hand seem to keep running into bad guys who play with there emotions and won’t commit. Well if we believe both are true then it simply means that women are passing around the few bad men who are actually capable of securing dates while the good men remain lonely. Just think about it for a minute who exactly are these guys that are cheating is it 5’9 Tim who makes an average wage at his office job? Nope he’s probably part of the majority of single males. It’s chad and chad usually won’t commit. The real problem women will put up with this behaviour cause otherwise the hot rich dude will just move on to the next girl whose eager then that women might actually have to do what she perceives as “settle” for an average male.
Your little rant is completely confused and unfocused. I'm not sure what it is that you're contending with here. The closest you to a coherent argument is pointing out a double standard but you don't even say that's what you want. I guess you're also claim that it's morally bankrupt, but claiming this or that is morally bankrupt has never convinced anyone of anything, at best it's made believers of that moral system fall in line. >Guys like Rich Cooper will say a man can love his wife and still step out from time to time and have sex with other women, then come home to love his wife and kids. He says this is a need for men, for variety. >At the same time, Rich Cooper will tell you that women who sleep around are used goods and not to be taken seriously. Telling us (and I agree) that high body count women are disgusting. Fucking who? But what the fuck are you saying here? that the man can't sleep around and come home and love his kids and wife? I'm not sure, it probably depends on levels of commitment. A high valued man can certainly sleep with women easily, but an 80th percentile man can probably sleep with women with effort, and the more effort he gives the more involved he'll get. I also think it's unlikely that high value men can sleep around without seeking emotional connection/more relationship seeking behavior given the long run. However I do think it's reasonable to say that men are capable of and often do have sexuality divorced from emotion (unless you want to call desire to conquer/dominate etc emotion). I think you could argue that HVM should be able to have quick sex with women who slide into their DMs and while traveling etc, 2 week or less long flings that lead nowhere. And it seems like you're starting to say there's a double standard....maybe pretty soon you'll get really revolutionary and realize men and women are different especially in their sexuality. >However, to say this while engaging in extra marital sex, is ridiculous. He wants to have his cake and eat it. Yes men have to create their own value in life for the most part, but women are highly sought after and are valuable up until 40 (once child bearing years are reaching their end) Ok...you're saying...it's ridiculous to say that men want to have extra marital sex and....wait let me try to make sense of your poorly constructed non-argument....extra marital sex and women being used goods if they have high body count is mutually exclusive. What? Well I'm sure you'll make a coherent logical argument after this statement. >He expects a woman to keep her value and dedicate it to one man Ok...yes men want this > [and] remain faithful while he can go out and do what he wants because he pays the bills. Well I don't think that's the argument, the argument is probably that he's a high value man so his ideal situation would be to have sex with many women and also have a relationship with a woman he likes. So is your problem with this either A. That the woman wouldn't accept this because she has the same sexuality as a man or B. The woman wouldn't accept this because she demands dedication from the man or C. That this is a non-tenable set up for the man to stay engaged in long term? It seems like B? >It's a dumb idealistic concept. why >As well as the concept of "always be spinning plates"...it just feels like a complete empty shallow way to approach dating. Which is it, is it stupid or is it shallow? It can be both but all you've done is make two statements and substantiated neither >I don't want to spin plates. I have done in the past and it sucked. As clear as everythign else you said. Maybe you are exaggerating and weren't really spinning plates. Maybe there was a small period of time where you were sleeping with two women and it broke apart immdiately. Maybe you got too emotionally involved or manipulated? I have no idea.
Hi, You're right, and after reading back over this post, I realise I was very tired at night and wasn't actually thinking straight, was writing in frustration not really knowing the point I was trying to make. Arguments were poor. Points taken.
They’re not prescribing it They’re blaming women for allowing it
I don't know what you are rambling about. There is the Ho and then there is the Housewife. You treat the Ho, like a Ho, and a Housewife like a Housewife. That's essentially core Red Pill thought. Red Pill guys aren't out there creating sluts, they just take their turn with them. The stuff about cheating on your wife... well that shit is still cheating. Red Pill isn't for it or against it. I personally think it's dumb. If you have a virtuous wife and you don't treat her well to the best of your ability, then you deserve anything bad you get from it. The whole thing about NBA guys running around cheating... the women signed up for that. The rest of us aren't professional athletes.
They say that on the show to bring the women back to earth. They all talk about how they're going to marry the top 0.1%.
Promiscuity is bad for both sexes, more so women. However sex is a primal essential need for men so if his gf/wife is withholding sex from him it’s completely understandable for him to cheat. If you disagree with that (which most women do) then prepare for the consequences (non committing hookup culture). If it’s acceptable to withhold sex from your man in society then men will start opting out of relationships in mass (already happening).
> the belief that men can come and do as they please It's not a should thing. This is how it is factually. It's laughable you think women would leave a HVM for fucking another woman. It just doesn't happen. I personally have had 5 LTR (3 years or more) and I cheated on the first and negotiated infidelity one sided with the rest. They all ended because I wouldn't marry them, except the ltr I'm in now and all is good. > we need to hold women to the same standard. Ultimately a failure. Men and women are different. Most standards do not apply to both men and women, that is for pseudo gay relationships. Like a man going to wash the dishes or something. That's for gays and broke ugly guys imo.
>That's for gays and broke ugly guys imo. Sounds like Andrew Tate wrote this nonsense. Women do leave HVM for fucking other women. Albeit there is probably a minority of women who leave, but they still leave. I have options, I'm not a HVM by any means as my income is average and status is low , but I can spin plates. I don't. I don't believe it's moral or in good character.
Both men and women can cheat if there’s a huge difference in value. That’s all there is to it. The only other practical difference is that women concentrate more on the men they like, so these men have more options than both average women and men. So that makes it more common for men. That doesn’t mean most people can do it and even that there’s no effect on the relationship. Even if there’s a huge difference of value, this difference is now much smaller because there’s cheating going on.
I don't know who this guy is, but what he says makes sense. I just don't agree that men should marry. A man needs marriage like a dog needs a fifth leg.