On the nature of women and the burden of performance.

Allow me to start with a trip down memory lane:

When we were boys–for those of us were lucky enough to grow up near rivers or lakes or the sea–going out on the water was a truly wondrous, mystical experience.

We’d reach our hands down over the side of the boat, dipping water into our palms and watching it flow back in tiny streams onto the surface. We’d pull fish from the depths below, cranking our reels with giddy squeals as the slippery thing at last came up and out of the water, into our father’s net. And our imaginations were alive with the infinite possibilities of the depths below–how many treasures did this new world hold and what could a man do to hold them?

But our fathers never let us forget: the sea is beautiful, but fantastically dangerous. A man can be thrown overboard and freeze or drown so fast no one would even notice, and the water wouldn’t say a thing as it lapped gently against the sides of an empty boat.

So we wear life vests, have whistles and horns to alert nearby boaters if something goes wrong, and we look out for others, because we know that even with all the safety equipment, on the water, things can still go wrong.


If your father ever taught you much about women, perhaps he told you a similar story…

More likely, however, he didn’t. Mine didn’t.

And if I had to guess, there are a lot of guys out there like me who had perfectly good fathers (in every other respect) who never really taught us about women in the way they taught us about the sea, hunting, fishing, cars, sports, etc.

Because the tacit assumption is that guys kinda figure it out for themselves. When we were old enough, we’d see women and discover their magic; we’d grow through our first loves in high school, get our hearts broken even as we broke them, but eventually we’d find the right one and that would be that. It would all sort itself out in the end.

And in our fathers’ defense, this used to be mostly true. It’s only been in recent years–maybe the last 10-15–where we’ve seen the true disintegration of the SMP. It’s not that men and women are so much different than they were in the past, but the framework that held things together is basically gone: women don’t need men to provide resources and are explicitly encouraged not to have children, and marriage for men is a huge life/financial risk with very few benefits compared with serial monogamy or plate spinning.

When you combine these facts with a loss of place and community, along with a society that is less inclined toward religious or civil organizations, men are now exposed to the capricious whims of female sexuality in a way we haven’t seen for millennia–if ever.

And what happens in such a society? Great tweet awhile back from my friend Magnum; apparently Rousseau, the great French philosopher, thought about this long ago:

Not sure if I like the word “tyrannized” to describe where we’re at now, because it strips men of agency and responsibility for our circumstances, but otherwise Rousseau is imagining a society very similar to the one we live in now.

For today’s women, by and large, are not domesticated (nor, too be honest, are most men, if we define domestication as adhering to sociocultural norms intended to stabilize the home, family, and larger society), nor are they constrained by modesty and shame. On the contrary, provided ubiquitous access to cameras and platfroms like IG, Tik-Tok, and others, many, if not most women have become self-publishing soft core pornographers, posing with their asses in the air or wearing scantily clad bikinis or semi nude in their bedrooms making duck lips–those bored ass eyes, sexy and yet soulless. And while this isn’t the case for all women, many rack up astronomical n-counts, going from man to man with the same ease and devil-may-care attitude as one selects fruit from a grocery store.

Again, I wouldn’t describe modern day women as tyrants–but they are dangerous in the sense that men, to them, are essentially disposable and easily replaceable. Sure, they still want male attention and sometimes dick–especially if it’s good dick–but with swipe dating they can have it anytime they want and the allure of sampling the next man for novelty’s sake often trumps maintaining a relationship with the last one.

I say dangerous because the infrastructure that encourages men to become romantics is still in place: we’re taught by novels and television and movies to pine after “the one”–that one special girl who’s beautiful and different and once we meet her everything will be wonderful because she’ll love us purely for who we are deep down.

Wrong. And unless you were lucky, your father probably didn’t disabuse you of this notion.

And no one’s immune.

Look at what’s happened to Prince Harry since meeting Megan Markle. He’s bent over backward to do whatever she’s wanted, up to and including giving up his title as Prince! Like so many men, Harry sees these acts as genuine gestures of love and affection–but guess how she sees them?

Weakness.

And I want to be clear: we shouldn’t blame women for acting this way–this is how they’ve evolved. A chief who falls in love with a woman in the tribe to the point where he throws away his status and power to defer to her every whim is going to get his tribe killed. So naturally, when women see men behave this way, it’s a massive turn off.

However, if you don’t understand this–or didn’t until recently–it’s most likely not your fault. This is the crux of the red pill: a view of the world, not as we would like or are taught it should be, but as it actually is.

OK, RPD, cut to the fucking chase man: what are you banging on about?

The Burden of Performance

The bottom line is that any man in any relationship has some burden of performance (again, I’ll credit Magnum as he was the first I’ve heard use the phrase).

Sometimes it’s fairly simple: for example, prostitution–man pays (burden of performance), woman rewards with sex.

The longer the relationship, the more complicated and varied this burden becomes–but it always exists. Game itself is an example of this. We are showing the woman that we are high value men (or at least mimicking the behavior of high value men): that we are socially competent, understand the secret society, and know how to make sex happen–and hopefully, are good at it. This is what good game conveys.

Financial success and fitness are other examples of how men fulfill this burden. Having a fun, attractive lifestyle is another. Being a leader, being dominant, being solid and stoic–all ways we can carry this burden of performance.

And yes, of course, women have a burden too–unfortunately (or maybe fortunately for those of us who are players), it’s become extremely reductive in modern society: be attractive (enough) and give sex. That’s basically it, and as many players have noted, this seems to be the only thing most women today are capable of providing. Maybe why I get so excited when I come home after a girl spends the night to find my bed made or my apartment tidied up.

What most women don’t understand, however, is that if this is all she brings to the table, it’s almost never going to be enough to earn long term commitment from a high quality man who’s successful with women.

However, it IS enough to earn commitment from lower quality men, or high quality men who don’t understand the nature of women. And for those guys, women can be very dangerous. Some of us know this from experience.

Apologize, because this has become a little rambling, but here are the takeaways:

  1. We should have compassion for that latter set of men–the guys who don’t understand women or the fact they have a burden to perform. Yes, sometimes these guys get irrationally angry, but when you get screwed as it relates to love, money, and children, it’s understandable–especially when they weren’t given the knowledge to navigate the modern world of women and relationships.
  2. We shouldn’t blame women for expecting us to perform. That’s the way it goes–the way it’s always been and the way it will always be. Instead, we need to understand the ways we can fulfill this burden, and identify what’s expected depending on the nature of each particular relationship.

In any case–I’m mostly stuck inside because of this damn virus (I don’t have it as far as I know, but basically everything is shut down so even if I wanted to go somewhere, it’s not much of an option), so I’ll be using this time to write and put out more posts. If you have any questions or topics you want me to tackle, hit me up in the comments or on Twitter.

Stay safe out there fellas!

7 thoughts

  1. >>So we wear life vests, have whistles and horns to alert nearby boaters if something goes wrong, and we look out for others, because we know that even with all the safety equipment, on the water, things can still go wrong.

    We are both thinking about outdoors and danger metaphors. https://theredquest.wordpress.com/2020/03/12/recent-additions-to-the-sex-club-guide-book/. Me with rock climbing and you with canoeing / boating.

    I like the metaphor because you can do everything right… and still have things go horribly wrong… but it’s smart to do things right. Marriage is like canoeing or rock climbing without safety equipment. You could be okay but you’re taking a lot of risk.

    The birth rate keeps going down… at the same time men are learning from their divorced fathers, uncles, etc. how the divorce system works… could those be connected??

    >>And yes, of course, women have a burden too–unfortunately (or maybe fortunately for those of us who are players), it’s become extremely reductive in modern society: be attractive (enough) and give sex. That’s basically it

    I’d offer a counterpoint…: most chicks find it hard to get in a serious relationship with a guy they perceive to be at or above their level. Sex? Easy. Long-term relationship and ideally a financial subsidy from the man? Hard. Relationship, subsidy, and a hot guy who’s good in bed? Very hard.

    Rollo’s “epiphany phase” is usually the woman deciding to let go of the “hot guy” demand and “settle down” with the guy who is offering a relationship and some money. Let one branch go and some of the other ones will become easier.

    Players find a lot of women who have little to offer apart from sex because women who have things to offer other than sex, and who have reasonable expectations for their partners, are (mostly) in relationships. The ones who only offer sex find it very hard to get into the relationships they want. Selection bias https://theredquest.wordpress.com/2019/04/24/red-pill-and-seduction-world-downsides/.

    If she only offers sex… a guy will take it for a while… then let her go when she doesn’t bring anything else valuable to the table… I have done this. Sometimes with pretty hot girls. A couple stories on the blog somewhere are about these girls.

    Nash likes to talk about k-selected girls who want to show a guy their entire lives before they get to the sex… an interesting point… I have not defaulted towards those girls to be honest, but they’re out there, and I think I’ve encountered them… most of them get married and have kids, if they want that, pretty young… I am thinking about a couple women in particular who fit this criteria. A woman who prioritizes having a family will usually have a family. A woman who sleeps around with a lot of guys and doesn’t develop herself will either not have a family (IUD, birth control) or have a broken family (guys raw dogging her while she’s drunk).

    Like

    1. Good comments.

      > I’d offer a counterpoint…: most chicks find it hard to get in a serious relationship with a guy they perceive to be at or above their level. Sex? Easy. Long-term relationship and ideally a financial subsidy from the man? Hard.

      I think you’re correct on this, but I’d argue the crux is “with a guy they perceive to be at or above their level.” IMO, Tinder, online dating, social media, and probably television and movies have massively distorted this perception. On SOD, women regularly match with guys who are 2+ points above SMV, so they perceive this as the sort of guy they should be getting, but we all know that those guys aren’t going to stick around with a chick who’s a 6 if he’s an 8, whether she’s bringing more to the table than sex or not.

      I have to admit, sometimes it is utterly fucking astonishing how picky girls are online. As a slow burn, I’ve kept a Meeting Mindful profile on my phone–mainly bc I forgot to delete it–but even so, guess how many matches I’ve had over two months? Zero. Not one. I finally deleted it today. And granted, some guys who’ve seen my pictures might say they’re not the best, but at the same time, it’s not as if I’m a fucking troglodyte either. Part of the reason I find this so maddening is that IRL, women respond to me: lots of IOIs and as you guys know if you follow the blog, when I bother to do cold approach, I do pretty well. The dissonance between online vs. IRL is crazy. Anyway, looks like all we might have for awhile is online, so maybe I better get better pics.

      Like

      1. Some of the better chicks I’ve been with say they’ve never done online either… Short Dancer and Ms. Slav come to mind.

        Some of the more irritating and delusional chicks I’ve known have spent the most time doing/trying to do online dating.

        In my experience online dating worked pretty well 2008 – 2015. Around then I mostly stopped and it seems to have stopped working since. I guess the market got flooded. When online was mostly a little bit harder (had to use a computer and type messages on a physical keyboard) it seemed to work better. When it shifted to phones, the whole thing seemed to fall apart.

        I have not worked hard at modern online, however, and that probably requires instagram and more effort than I realistically put in. But that is part of the point… old online worked pretty well with 3 – 4 pics and a decent bio… new doesn’t seem to work that well.

        Agree that a lot of chicks are delusional… cause the ones who aren’t delusional get what they want and don’t spend nearly as much time on the dating market. And if they do run into players for a little interlude, they hit the “Where is this going?” talk pretty quickly. If they don’t like the answer, they get off the ride, as opposed to the girls who spend months or years of their sexual prime messing around with players.

        Like

  2. I came to this post expecting a nice 15 minute read while my chicken was baking in the oven. Instead I found myself buried in a barrage of nested reference links. Fine way to spend my Monday evening hunkering down while the world takes on the coronavirus.

    >And in our fathers’ defense, this used to be mostly true. It’s only been in recent years–maybe the last 10-15–where we’ve seen the true disintegration of the SMP.

    I suspect the seed of SMP disintegration* was sown many years before Game became a thing, possibly just after the first wave of feminism. Media didn’t help much either. In Unchained Man, Black Dragon he lays out the shift in media’s portrayal of men from “Bruce Willis and Harrison Ford” to “Keanu Reeves and Nicolas Cage” between the 80’s and 90’s.

    It’s not a coincidence that Mystery and PUA popped up 15 years ago, at the turn of the millennium. Mystery’s infamous neg was meant to rebalance SMV distortion. Girls realized how powerful of a tool their appearance is; Mystery diffused sought to diffuse you that from the get go. He was on to something mighty fierce.

    >I say dangerous because the infrastructure that encourages men to become romantics is still in place:

    Great insight! I don’t see this social programming going away anytime soon. Men that try to live out this Disney fairy tale by ignoring thots are really missing out on opportunity. What they don’t realize is that the fundamentals required to attract the cute booty girls on Tik Tok is, at its core, the same thing that will attract their damsel in distress. Confidence, selfishness, leadership, fitness. Frame. Unfortunately, you can’t internalize game without taking TRP, so the man who believes in the Disney fantasy will never reach his potential. He will forever live ignorantly confused as to why his wife only gives him blowjobs on his birthday, despite him working overtime to take her and the family out to to Paris for their annual summer vacation.

    >However, it IS enough to earn commitment from lower quality men, or high quality men who don’t understand the nature of women. And for those guys, women can be very dangerous.

    Here’s where reality kicks in. Most women have no idea how dangerous they are. Women instinctively test a man and reach beyond his boundaries, gradually. She doesn’t realize what she’s doing, but everytime he compromises, just a tad bit, she’s ambivalent. On one hand, she’s taming a high-quality man. On the other, he’s weak for giving in. It’s our duty to enforce boundaries and to give her an experience she truly craves. A man who enforces his code.

    I would argue Meghan is aware, to a degree, of what’s she’s pulling. She hopes in her heart Harry will man up and say “No. I’m a Prince and my family, my country mean more to me than you ever will. If you can’t deal with that, this won’t work.” He gave up his title for this women, and the media is celebrating it. Who’s more confused right now? Harry or Meghan? I honestly don’t know.

    *Great post by Red Coco. https://redcoco.blog/2019/07/09/sexual-marketplace-deregulation/

    Like

Leave a Reply to RP McMurphy Cancel reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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