I was married for 13 years. I believe the reason we lasted so long was that I truly believed we loved each other. It was only when I saw after all those years that she did not love me for who I am, but rather for what I could do for her, that I choose to leave her.



I was very blue pill and I’ve come a long way.



This article today in the Atlantic reminded me of this:

Women, more than men, tend to feel stultified by long-term exclusivity Wednesday Martin, The Atlantic

This quote is absolutely spot on. Read a book like “Sperm Wars” or even Tom Torero’s “Below the Belt“. Or better yet get years of real world experience as I have between my former ex’s and the many women I’ve dated since. The red pill reality becomes clear.

Blackdragon did a very good interview with a woman who was unusually aware and candid of her nature. It’s the most red pill thing I’ve ever read. Every man should read this to understand female nature.



Women have a dual mating strategy. They either want you for your DNA (lover) or for your resources (provider). Women are not capable of loving you for who you are as an individual man.

Women love what you can do for them, their love is reserved for their children. And women are never loyal to you. They are loyal to your power.



It’s driven by biology. Nature sets us up with infatuation to pair bond for a couple of years tops to make a baby, and then there is some sort of internal mechanism that causes women to eventually tire of a man as a lover and look elsewhere for a new source of DNA, in order to diversify her offspring and maximize her chances of passing on her genes.

It can be painful for men to accept this because even no matter how tight your game is, no matter how much a girl is in to you, at some point she will eventually move on.

There is no end game, there is no one girl that will be your “ride or die” girl for life. I find this transient nature to be the darkest red of the red pill.

I believe this is why most men, even experienced players, close their eyes to reality and entertain romantic fantasies such as “this girl is different from all the rest,” and why men have unfounded purity fantasies of some girls being “good girls” and some girls being “bad girls”.

It’s completely false. All women are out to get good DNA at points in their life, while keeping up the good girl front so they can eventually win over a provider. It’s nature’s way, I don’t blame women one bit.



But there is no ideal situation for men. We are not the choosers when it comes to sex. Instead we can either:



1. Go for pair bonding and a relationship knowing that there is a shelf life of just a few years of passion. She may stay with you and she may not even cheat, but her passion for you will die.



2. Or have ongoing one night stands and harems with girls that come and go from your life over time.

For me, the short to medium term harem option is the best trade off. I create a portfolio of sex and affection. If and when any one girls spins out of my orbit, I have others to keep up the slack. And all the while I work to bring new girls into the mix.



The trade off is that transient nature of it can be tough, especially when girls you like spin off. But then again everything in life is transient.

This is why men need to be internally referenced – have a larger mission in life besides relationships – if we’re to avoid falling back into the blue pill trap like the men in the Atlantic article.

Stay strong, keep the frame, and have relationships on your terms.

As always – welcome your thoughts and comments.

Share this: Twitter

Facebook

Like this: Like Loading... Related