On a somewhat lighter note than my last post, here is a lesson in, er, economics from the Red Pill subreddit.
Yeah, I’m not sure that “logical” is the word you’re looking for there, champ.
If this screenshot is blurry — someone told me they were having problems with this — here’s the text:
thebears1986 67 points 1 year ago
Women used to maintain a pussy cartel. To get any pussy you had to get married. Men want pussy so they got married. The cartel broke down a bit and women started giving access to pussy after engagement. Then the effort was lowered some more and the couple only had to be “going steady”. Next was “in a committed relationship” and eventually the “3 date rule”. Today you just swipe right on a smartphone.
Women currently sell into a hyper-competitive sex market where once they were buyers with a huge upper hand. The market is flooded and prices have dropped to $0.00. Gone are the days where they could demand any sort of commitment in exchange for access. Women still want men so they provide extra services to the men to compete for attention. Naked pics are extra services they use to keep up with the many women competing for the man they want. Either they send the pics or the guy moves on to the women who will.
I think the next major innovation will be women grouping together to offer threesomes to men in exchange for attention. Once naked pics become normalized they will have to do something. This is the next logical step.
H/T — I think someone on the Blue Pill subreddit linked to this recently; I can’t find the post
Like what, lawn care?
What a bunch of horseshit. No, horseshit at least makes good compost.
Yet again, we have folks who think that sex is something women give to men, rather than something two (or more) people have.
For my sanity, I’m going to stop reading the articles, and assume that’s what they’re about from here on in. I’ll probably be right 90% of the time.
So, in no way they could think that the reason why women have sex earlier is because well they just want to have sex without being committed to a jerk?
I mean, what is more empowering for women who love sex? I think having sex without the obligation to be married with one jerk or another jerk is pretty empowering…
ps: I know not all men are jerks (hey, we have David Futrelle ^^), but in my environment a lot of them are. So maybe if there are jerk-free men* here, come to my country asap! :p
* jerk-free, but also non-sexist, respectfull, no racist, not homophobic, not transphobic, no arrogant prick,… (am I too picky?)
It never even appears to them that many women might in fact enjoy sexual encounters with men, does it? they think we just ever use sex to somehow trap them.
I wonder if this has something to do with red pillers being shitty lovers who have never in their lives satisfied a woman.
Wait, what?
I thought that the RedPillers were all in a tizzy about all the sex they weren’t having with those terrible withholding wimmens, and now apparently it’s a buyers’ market?
These people think as little of men as they do of women, don’t they.
But, wait, didn’t Roosh V. tell us Pussy Inflation was going to price men out of the market?* Is the price of pussy too damn high, or is it $0.00? I need to know so I can decide whether to tell my broker to buy or short-sell pussy.
*: Full credit–the link to the Roosh piece was at the bottom of this one, in ‘related links’. The juxtaposition was simply perfect.
Yeah, doesn’t this contradict their usual SMV theories?
EDIT: Ninja’d multiple times.
I just found this blog and I love it. I sometimes feel like I would like to sit down with people like our hero RedPiller above, from my perspective of a middle aged man, father of four, in a loving and sexual relationship; one of mutual respect and caring, and just: I don’t know….Have a talk about sex. What it really is, or can be. He’s obviously very inexperienced and it’s not looking too good for his future learning
I’ll wager that at least half the people reading this are visualising a smokey boardroom filled with cats in business suits.
And what if it turns out that it was never about the quality of his partners, and that our RedPiller was just terrible at sex all along? (very likely).
I think it would be neat if, like all the other things listed in the OP that have become more socially acceptable over the decades, poly relationships (not the fetishised 3some scenario OP imagines) were recognised as valid in the same way that monogamous relationships are currently.
But OP’s assumption that women would be falling over themselves “in groups” to offer him 3-somes for attention, instead of just dating each other, is adorable.
I don’t get it. What service do these Alpha Males offer that’s so amazing and valuable that I’m supposed to offer them discount pussy, two for the price of one, in order to get access to it?
@Alan Robertshaw- and you would not be incorrect! Although in my head at least one of the cats is wearing a Che tee-shirt :-p
.
https://camo.githubusercontent.com/172ba9aef9d242717a0b654d5bfdcfb6a4dc7d99/68747470733a2f2f7261772e6769746875622e636f6d2f6875626f742d736372697074732f6875626f742d627573696e6573732d6361742f67682d70616765732f616e696d617465642d627573696e6573732d6361742e676966
Or, or, stay with me here “thebears1986”, men used to shame women (and some still do) for having sex out of wedlock. The idea of being socially shunned is a powerful one. Some people will do anything, even abstaining from sex, just to be socially accepted by family, friends, ect.
Long ago, virgins were valued (and are still valued by such shitheels as TRPers) for men to have sex with, and men wanted to only marry virgins, so they told women that having sex out of wedlock was a “sin”. Of course, that didn’t stop bachelors from visiting brothels or having sex with someone else, because yay sexism!
Then, eventually, social stigmas let up, and women were able to get away with having sex earlier and earlier in their relationship with little to no Community Shunning, and now we have women who are having casual no-strings attached sex, just like men have done for the longest time with no social consequences besides the occasional gross person calling them a slut or a whore!
Not that those are really even insults anymore. I don’t fuck, have sex, or talk about my sex life with people who would call me any sexually degrading name with any kind of venom, so they’re just shaming me for the sex they assume I’m having. (Which must be awesome judging by how mad they are about it.)
I think this is a serious case of “I’m just mad the feeemales are having sex (but not with me)!” kind of sour grapes.
Shocking how these guys who hate women so much spend so much time thinking about having sex with them. It really is unbelievable.
Kind of in love with this post. I’ve struggled to put into words exactly why I hate so many analysis of human relationships using metaphors from economics. I really couldn’t ask for a better example of why that sort of thinking tends to suck.
Also, if I were a riot grrrl, I’d totally start a band called Pussy Cartel.
A lot of folks with the most superficial understanding of economics, based on a few nuggets retained from high school Econ 101, think this superficial understanding either actually can sum up all social interactions, or really ought to
A long-ass time ago, some commenters phrased it as “When an MRA has a hammer, everything looks like a nail”.
They see this solution to an economic problem, and they’re so fond of it, they apply it everywhere else in their life, regardless of if it fits or not.
And their favorite “hammer” is the “Femmucommunazi Conspiracy” Theory. Everything is Feminism’s fault, somehow.
“Women will start competing for men’s attention”…lol they wish. Not trying to sound sexist but women have always been the receiving ones in the heterosexual game, not the chasers. Not that there’s anything wrong with the latter. These “MRA” guys sound very deprived.
I definitely don’t want someone to marry me so that he (because it’s always a he, of course) can finally have sex with me, the only thing he’s ever found valuable about being with me. If someone who might have otherwise proposed will not propose if I have sex with him, then holy crap, thank goodness he won’t propose. Bullet effing dodged.
Turns out in a marriage you do more things together than lawn mowing and occasional boning.
@Viscaria
I know, I mean being desired is great but not when it’s the ONLY thing on these guys’ minds… >.>
Omg, this. Forever this.
MRAs just really fucking hate women doing what we want to do. Getting tattoos? Remaining single? Having opinions? Casual sex? It’s all misandering! And one day we’ll all be very sorry we didn’t listen to them because… something something about cats and spinsters.
Reading all their stuff, I have one question. Women supposedly are committing misandry right and left because they hate men, right? So if they make a deal with a woman for sex, why would they include a guy?
I think we need a concussion protocol for MRA’s.
The pussy market sure is volatile these days! One day my vagina is an overpriced bus, the next, it’s worth $0.00. I’m going to have to do hourly stock market ticker checks so I can be sure to know at all times when my pussy value is up or down. I’d hate to buy high and sell low on accident.
In all seriousness, I’m sure the author of this post does not have women constantly sending nude selfies to him, desperate to keep his attention. He’s just feigning that this so. Partially to gain status among other misogynists. Partially as a neg. He’s so hopeful a couple of women will get spooked and offer him a three way. He knows it’s the only chance, however remote, he’ll get one.