Players play: why women viewing men as disposable makes LTR’s dumb.

A couple very cool things have happened recently.

The first is that I’ve been connecting with Coco, Magnum, and RedQuest on a message thread and on the phone, and it’s been tremendous to get to know those guys better and learn from their experiences.

The second is watching Mr. V’s meteoric rise via day game through Twitter.

A third is that a few guys have reached out for coaching. That’s not something I’ve thought a lot about until now and it’s not why I write the blog, but I’m happy to give guys advice. I’m extremely well versed in the fundamentals of game and dating, and I’m reasonably good at cold approach whether day or night game. To be clear, however, I am not an expert, nor am I making such a claim.

Anyway, you can contact me through the site via email or reach out on Twitter (@redpilldadpua) through the DMs.

Anyway, a talk with RedQuest a few days ago along with a few experiences I’ve had lately with chicks kinda sparked an epiphany.

Here’s the basic premise: men today are largely disposable for women who are 6’s or above in terms of SMV. SOD (swipe/online dating) and social media give any reasonably attractive woman a huge advantage in the sexual marketplace–most can match with or meet guys 1 to 2 points above her own SMV on a regular basis, have dates paid for, etc.

Of course they bemoan the fact none of these guys (fuckbois) tend to stick around after the bang (and why would a male 8 want to LTR a female 6?), but women are inherently irrational and as always, chalk relationship failures up to men being jerks 100% of the time rather than accepting any level of personal responsibility for out-kicking the coverage in terms of SMV.

We also have to remember that when it comes to scarcity, humans don’t think about longevity or sustainability–they think about short term availability. And for most semi-attractive women, men are readily available anytime: she can get on Tinder or go to a bar or DM some guy on Instagram and have sex with a fairly attractive man within a week’s time or less.

So even though we of TRP know that this window of attractiveness is very short (18-30ish) and that the wall is coming, this doesn’t factor into the calculation for most attractive women–men are plentiful now and they assume that will always be the case, including when they’re ready to settle down, get married, and have kids.

In addition, because today’s women have been told to focus on career first, relationships and family later, most feel no urgency to find a high quality guy, lock him down, etc. Indeed, most of the chicks I’ve banged in the last year have been in their 20’s, and my impression is that a lot of attractive girls in that age group spend months or in some cases years out of the game completely: not going out, not on Tinder, not fucking Chad, but instead working 2-3 jobs to pay off student loans or save money or travel, binge watching Netflix, and/or doing stuff with family and friends.

This runs counter to the orthodox redpill narrative that all attractive women are constantly fucking–a claims that falls pretty flat if you interact with women on a regular basis.

Anyway, we see this in how women of today treat men: they don’t respond to texts, ghost, flake, and take opportunities to meet high quality men for granted on a weekly if not daily basis. After all, when you’re sitting at a buffet, it’s not a matter of if there’s enough food–it’s a matter of how hungry you are.

Women today are not hungry, which means, as I stated earlier, no matter how good looking you are, or even to some extent how rich, some portion of women will take even extremely high quality men for granted–even guys like Magnum get flaked on, and that mofo is handsome AF and super successful.

As an aside, I scored a bit of a coup last week–I’ll save the surprise for later when I have more time to write the field report properly–but the upshot for this post is that I did this chick a huge favor, and she then proceeded to treat me like any other dipshit on our next date, despite the fact that my game was on point and we’d already fucked (if you don’t know about Briffault’s Law, look it up).

But what I realized walking home is that because men have become disposable to women, women–aside from sex–have become disposable to high quality men. Perhaps more importantly in terms of the larger effect on society, the fact men have become so disposable to women necessarily undermines monogamy and marriage, which at the end of the day, most women want.

The media have lately been making a big deal about how there aren’t enough “economically attractive men” for women to marry, which is probably somewhat true, but I’d argue the bigger problem is that many women treat men as disposable for too long, blow past the wall, and then the truth is that “economically attractive men” aren interested in them.

RedQuest has a post I’ve previewed (I’ll link to it once he posts) on why women hate the demystification of romance and why they hate game, even though it’s better for them if guys have game and they ultimately want guys to have game. This dovetails with Mr. V’s latest conundrum, which is that a couple of his ladies are trying to get him into an exclusive relationship (at least from what I can tell based on the Tweets).

He reached out and asked me what I thought about that, and it’s basically the same thing I had to tell myself last Spring when Yoga girl got me to agree to be exclusive after we’d shared a couple bottles of wine: sexual strategy is amoral, and though I agreed to the LTR (dumb), I had no intention of following through.

Because why? Why should I hamstring myself with some moral promise when I know it won’t be reciprocated? Why should I lower my value to her and other girls, when her value remains unchanged or elevated? Most of all, why should I want to be monogamous when I can basically count on the fact that a huge number of women are out there on the market, ready to date and fuck should the mood strike them? All I need to do is go out and run some day game, night game, or pick one up from my social circle–and I know my game is strong enough that doing that I can bang at least one new chick a month (often two or three), with some residual lays coming from plates and girls I’ve banged before who come back.

Why give that up?

An exclusive relationship means the man is giving up his sexual strategy while acquiescing to hers–she gets to lock down a HQ guy and gets security, comfort, and provisioning (don’t know about you guys, but I don’t think I’ve ever been with a girl–even a fuck buddy–where she ended up paying more on dates, dinners, etc. than I did), while the guy gets very little security (she can leave at any time because men are disposable) or benefit in exchange. I’ll grant that there is some comfort in an LTR that you don’t get being a player–and depending on the situation, sex can become more regular–but that’s pretty thin given all the other things you’re giving up, and I should also point out that her comfort is ALWAYS going to come before yours.

It’s worth mentioning again–just because you’ve agreed to an LTR doesn’t mean you’ve got any guarantees she’s going to stick around or be a decent human being about breaking up with you when the time comes.

I was talking with a guy last night who was living with a girl and had to stay home from work one day because he was sick. Midday this chick shows up, asks WTF are you doing home, then proceeds to take her personal belongings, throw them in another guy’s truck outside, and jet off to California. That’s an extreme example, but the point is he had no indication whatsoever that there was anything wrong, and most guys don’t until she’s already moved on to another dick. Men are now so disposable there’s very little a guy can count on in any monogamous relationship that will tie her to him with any real fidelity–the only exceptions are children and/or living in a tight knit community and/or her being an exceptional woman.

The upshot is: players play. If you have the looks and the game to score 7’s and 8’s or beyond in their 20’s and 30’s, whether through cold approach or SOD (swipe/online dating), why in fuck’s name would you ever enter into a relationship where you have zero power and no guarantees?

And please, spare me the nonsense about “if you hold frame, if you’re hyper masculine, if you’re a boss, etc. things will always work out and every chick will worship you.” No. Every guys gets flaked, dumped, ghosted, and shit on by at least some portion of girls, no matter who he is or how he behaves (why I wrote recently about guys who do nothing but crow are probably full of shit). Having strong frame, being masculine, fucking her good, and all that other stuff is why a lot of chicks come back after some time, but nothing any guy does can match the whimsical, emotional rollercoaster of the hamster wheel spinning in her mind.

I’m not saying guys should despair–far from it. This blog is a testimony to the fact that if you follow TRP, lift, and learn game, you can fuck a lot of chicks in a very short time frame. My point is two-fold:

  1. Understand that there will be a lot of rejection, much of it completely irrational and often unexpected. This is true even if your game is tight, so one of the things that’s crucial for guys to learn is when their game is bad vs. when the girl is just being a girl because men are disposable. Why IMO you should write field reports if you want to get better.
  2. Don’t commit to an LTR, and for fuck’s sake, don’t get married.

Now I should concede here that there are some exceptions.

Wanting kids is the main one. Assuming you’ve vetted the girl, marriage with children can be a fine choice, because in that case, you ARE NOT disposable. You’re the children’s father and that means something, even if it’s still not enough to prevent her from divorcing you when she doesn’t have the feelz after 4-5 years.

This, I would argue, is the main reason most married couples stay together: they get married, have kids, and love the kids enough that they can tolerate the other person, even though sex rarely happens and they’re more friends than lovers–that and they’ve both let themselves go so much they don’t have better options. There’s a strong incentive for women not to divorce the father of their kids so long as they’re prosperous financially and he isn’t a total loser, because playing house is fun and fits in with what society expects her to be doing.

The other exception is the exceptional chick.

Some girls, despite what the manosphere so often trumpets, are actually good girls who want to be a submissive wife, have a family, and love their husband faithfully. These girls are probably not on Tinder, their n-count is less than 5-6, and they usually go to church and/or volunteer for some kind of charity. She may have had one or two crazy experiences, but she’s much more comfortable in a relationship. And hh by the way, these girls are not posting pics of themselves slutting it up on Instagram, nor are they getting drunk at clubs every weekend.

Problem is, they’re damned few and far between, because that’s not what our culture tells women to be. No, our culture tells women to be sluts, masculine, flaunt their sexuality, and view men as generally… disposable. Even worse, a lot of guys buy it. Like, how many husbands run around saying, “happy wife; happy life” and/or “I’m lucky she puts up with me” which translated means: “I’m a worthless, disposable worm.” And some guys do get lucky and their wives don’t divorce them, but even then, it’s often a sexless marriage and a lot of fucking work on the guy’s part to keep her happy.

So if and when that hottie you’re banging wants to get serious and says, “where is this going? Who else are you seeing? I want to be exclusive…” don’t feel bad when you tell her no, OR, if you want to keep banging her and don’t think she’ll come around, tell her what she wants to hear and then do whatever the fuck you want. CainPrice on the mothership (not sure how long that will exist) has a good post about serial monogamy for men, although I would say the best thing is bang several girls, run game, and just don’t talk about it.

The point is that sexual strategy is amoral. It is for her. There’s no reason it shouldn’t be for you.

Obviously if you want to have kids or you come across an exceptional girl, you should do things differently, but here’s the reality for about 80-90% of chicks who have an SMV of 6+ by the time she’s 24:

  • She’s sent nude pictures to tens if not hundreds of boys at her high school and on social media. In college: rinse and repeat.
  • She’s got a lot of half naked pictures on her Instagram and posts a pic or story at least 3-4 times a week, if not everyday, and sometimes posts multiple pics or stories a day.
  • She’s cheated on at least one of her boyfriends.
  • At any one time she’s probably DMing or texting between 5-10 guys. They may only be orbiters, but they don’t know that, and she knows any of them would fuck her in a heartbeat.
  • She’s slept with at least 5 guys off Tinder (SOD), and her n-count is 20-30+.
  • Her life has been pretty soft–things have generally been taken care of for her and very few people have told her no or stood up to her, especially men, including her own father.

That’s not the resume of a chick you want to marry.

She’s basically zeroed out her ability to pair bond, she’s addicted to sexual attention via social media, and as a consequence, as soon as she gets bored in the marriage she’s going to divorce her husband and take as much as she can get in terms of cash and custody.

Might she stay married if the guy has strong frame, makes good money, and doesn’t give her an excuse to jet? Maybe. And children make that prospect more likely, but as the cliche goes: would you jump out of an airplane with a parachute that might open?

Of course not–and as Nash pointed out recently, the very nature of agreeing to an LTR sets you up for beta-ization. Indeed, the act of marriage is by its nature a beta move. Doesn’t mean that the guy can’t be an alpha in a lot of other ways, but not fucking other girls is beta. Even chicks think so deep down, even if they’d never admit it out loud. And because of that, marriage with the chick I described above is going to be exceedingly difficult–constant shit tests, complaining, withholding sex, etc.

Do you really want to sign up for that?

No thanks.

So my advice boys: keep your options open. Don’t define the relationship, and if she wants to, you’ve got one of four options:

  1. I’m not ready to be exclusive–I want to get to know you more and explore our chemistry.
  2. I’m too busy to make that kind of commitment/not sure where I’ll be in a few years.
  3. Explain that you’re non-monogamous and sexually adventurous. You could potentially follow this up by suggesting role play or going to a sex club together.
  4. Agree to be exclusive, but then continue doing whatever it is you were doing. I like this least because it’s dishonest, but I don’t view that as any sort of moral issue in this case, because sexual strategy is amoral. And here’s the truth: after enough time, she’s gone if she gets a better offer or gets bored–in other words, she’s basically taking the same position you are, even if that’s not what she tells herself.

Players play. Simps settle.

And there has never been a better time to be a player.

6 thoughts

  1. > This runs counter to the orthodox redpill narrative… falls pretty flat if you interact with women on a regular basis

    Hey RPD. Just this week, I was trying to make clear that I have respect for you. That is easy for me to do. I like so much of what you have to say… particularly when it’s based on your PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, and less so when it’s “redpill” – much of which is guys with no exp repeating other guys complaints about women. What a circle jerk that is.

    I have been reading more of your stuff lately, again.. as I think you look to have really solid game. And I enjoy when you’re specific/personal about women. You get it. It’s easy to see.

    But I don’t comment here much… as I think you are a cool guy, “wearing a redpill suit”… one that doesn’t really fit you very well… as you’re much cooler than the suit. Bad metaphor, but that is how I feel.

    “Women think men are disposable” sounds like the “redpill orthodoxy” to me. And I mean that in an insulting way (to redpill, not to you).

    Q: Is this true in YOUR LIFE? Do women find YOU disposable? If so, are you typical?

    I bet… women do NOT find you disposable (you seem cooler than that). If they find “avg guy” disposable, it’s because he is. Low value is low value.

    And I bet YOU get “disposed” sometimes (and so do I) in large part as you’re doing some cold approach, living like a player, etc. Not all of that is typical either.

    So… NAMALT.

    I think you personally represent two reasons why your own theory is “typical redpill asleep” – as you likely get better than average reactions (because of YOU, who gives a fuck about “average guys”) and you probably also get more rejection/flakes… because you run more volume, talk to more girls, and reach beyond the “low hanging fruit.”

    This “women find men disposable” sounds to me like “social justice” for MGTOWs, which is what so much of “redpill” sounds like. It’s a reaction to femicunts saying “men are disposable,” and redpill reacts (which is all redpill does), as if femicunts warrent a reaction at all. It’s a BS premise. Redpill “average guys” see the truth in it, as they have little/no value… thus they need an explanation for it.

    I am being insulting, but I can also be specific.

    WHICH GUY? Are all guys the same? SJW retards think all people of a given color are interchangeably the same… which is obviously sub-intelligent. If we are a little brighter than that, we can start to say “which guy?” and see that a lot of guys are NOT disposable… and those men tend to have more value than the “disposable variety.”

    > most can match with or meet guys 1 to 2 points above her own SMV on a regular basis, have dates paid for, etc.

    Sound like you’re talking about “online chicks.” Still a lot of different psych there… but girls that will fuck quick, and are online, they might have a disposable mentality… but definitely NAWALT.

    > my impression is that a lot of attractive girls in that age group spend months or in some cases years out of the game completely

    And once again, I think you’re showing personal savvy which is in conflict w/ the keyboard jockey BS from trendy redpill zombies. Are men disposable for that group of women you describe above? Are they any different than rapid thots on Insta/Tinder?? Likely some difference.

    NAWALT… except for low value males… in which case, yeah, “you’re fucked bro,” but that’s STILL not about the women.

    I am on a tear this year about WHAT GUY, WHAT GIRL, and WHAT CONTEXT. That is antithetical to redpill “social justice for men” and I’m happy to play that role.

    In general… I think you have a lot to share… and your FIELD WORK (pickups/dates/rels) is an area most of the redpill types will never have access to… and I think you’re closer to the truth when you start in the field.

    This is THE difference between MEN OF GAME (you’re a great example) and REDPILL dudes: In GAME you have to test your theories. In “redpill” you can repeat MGTOW anthems and… all the other redpillers clap, no matter how out of touch those MGTOW ideas are.

    I like to debate this stuff… but I am a fan of your position in the SMP, which is about you, your skills (NAMALT). You have a lot of great game ahead of you… and you’re likely to outgrow the “redpill suit” as you have access to “real life” in a way that the reddit guys never will.

    Cheers to you, man. Respect.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I appreciate the comment and thoughts.
      I’ll have a longer post that elaborates on what I mean, but I think the overall point is that unless you set yourself apart, it’s very easy for women to see you as “just another guy.” I also think that because male attention is so cheap because of social media and swipe dating, it’s easy for women to see men as having lower value than what they actually do. This is reinforced by our society, which often portrays men as dumb ass schlubs who have no frame and can’t lead or command any value.
      TBH, I think some women have found me disposable, even after we’ve been together a few times. Most often that is not the case, but what I was driving at here is that in the short run, from the pick up (or match) to the first/second date, it’s very easy for her to disregard or write you off as “just another guy.” Our goal through that first part of the relationship is to make her see that we’re not.
      As a guy who focuses purely on day game, you certainly understand this, right? We get rejected all the time, which is essentially the girl saying, “nah, I’ve got better options,” or “I don’t need this right now,” or “another guy will be there when I need a dude” even though we’ve done something extraordinary by approaching her during the day with good game, banter, and rapport.
      Doesn’t that speak to the fact we’re all somewhat disposable? Because if not, shouldn’t she jump at the chance to meet a cool guy who’s got the balls to cold approach? As we know, there might be any number of reasons she decides not to reply to the text or not give her number in the first place, but the point is: she passed. And again, TBH, on some dates I’ve had trouble conveying my value or whatever I did convey wasn’t what she was looking for.
      The fact is social media and SOD have made all of us more disposable. Women too. It is what it is. Better to recognize that and move on with the truth IMO, than to not acknowledge it and take it as a personal burden.
      I like that you are pushing back against TRP, and I’m not an orthodox believer. But I’m not naive, and I think some of the things we see in the modern world should be acknowledged, whether we like them or not.
      Cheers brotha!


  2. I don’t know if you have heard of WAATGM

    Below is their web page intr. It is good for all men to see. I hope you will allow it to be posted here.

    Women in their 20s have numerous opportunities to date the decent men they claim to want, but many reject or friendzone these men for jerks and promiscuity. She takes advantage of a man’s kindness for attention and favors, then accuses him of thinking he was entitled to sex just for being nice.

    But when she’s in her 30s with depreciating looks, jerks who won’t commit, the likelihood of being a single mom, and the social pressure from her married friends, she asks “Where have all the good men gone?”[1][2] Funny how back when she was chasing the bad boys he was a “NiceGuy™” unworthy of dating, but now that she’s past her prime and needs a bailout he’s a “real man” who treats her with respect.

    Furthermore, dating jerks and riding the carousel before settling down with a good man is deliberately planned by women,[1][2][3] and encouraged by feminists. They then come to the dating market with unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves. Such women are totally unaware that the mature, financially stable men they now seek are the same decent men they rejected, except these men remember the rejection and are responding in kind to avoid unstable, unappreciative women who view them more as ATMs than romantic partners.

    The reason women end up here is because their behavior is not exposed as the lucid, self-destructive, feminist ideology that it is. And we’re here to help Good Men guard their commitment and resources by exposing women who would make poor life partners and mothers of their children. Providing observations and opinions on the posts here allows us to better understand women’s psyche and later depressive/miserable state when they are not held to a moral standard required for healthy, functioning relationships.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s