All the specs here are WRONG.


Correct them.

https://www.nairaland.com/6869006/wife-changed-all-property-documents


Everything a man should NOT be.

heartofcity12:


I saw the video . The lady seems to have a huge crush on Leonardo DiCaprio. She was all over him in the video even in the presence of Jeff Bezos. You can’t negotiate genuine interest/desire and hypergamy isn’t only money related lol.

I feel bad for Bezos. The girl totally embarrassed and emasculated him. Made him look insignificant and jealous.

Her body language is completely opened to DiCaprio. Inviting him to take her. It's like Bezos is not even there.

The girl just told the whole world that DiCaprio could fxck Bezos' girl with EASE if he wants. Funnily enough, DiCaprio probably wouldn't have even taken the time to entertain her if she was not sharing the prestige and status of Bezos.

This shows the importance of learning how to navigate a relationship with women. Because that, and perhaps looks, is the only thing that DiCaprio has over Bezos.

Bezos is roughly 780X richer.
Bezos has more influence.
Bezos is likely to be even more famous 'cause I personally didn't know DiCaprio by name or work until today. Only as a meme.

Now, Bezos is so hurt he had to call out DiCaprio on Twitter. This is another typical Beta Behaviour - crucifying a man for the offence of 'your' woman.

Bezos should learn from his ordeal with Mackenzie.

If a fellow man can easily rob you of your freedom yet you can't do anything about it but to collect an overused and abused pussy as a worthy exchange, then you're not the sh1t you think you are.

It's like saying pussy is worth your freedom. Or even life. That's just repulsive nonsense.

Luminouz, you must be a very kind-hearted person.

Guys like that don't need your advice or pity. They are just for amusement. Watch them and laugh. Plus, there's no way he would have taken your advice. You're just a stranger trying to put a wedge between him and his own personal angel.

He was never going to listen.

Don't advise anyone on relationship. Everyone already thinks they are EXPERTS at it.

Even if they are heading for hell, let the flames of hell script its indelible lessons on their skin.

TheDarkGamer:
Watch Jordan Peterson's videos on YouTube. He talks about equality, feminism, liberal culture etc.

Very educative and you also get to see how feminists respond in logical situations.

Dave Chappelle is also a great study. Specifically, his "sticks and stones" show.

By the way, has anyone noticed that women are now used as referees in Male VS Male wrestling matches?

The various niches in the entertainment industry constantly struggle to outdo each other in "wokeness".

The entertainment industry is conquered, sport is probably the next.

BLOODYSPERM:
She was there during my hard times now she will enjoy the good times with me , you think women are logical beings who will treat life process like you and give a fvck about the past LMFAO , dummy, remember briffaults law, Hypergamy doesn't care about what you offered ( relational equity), empower a woman and you shoot yourself in the foot


Moral lesson
Learn from Robert Simpyosaki the author of rich Dad poor Dad, a classical book of all times,who built with his woman from the scratch,when he attained fame and status, they were on the same level, equal partners in everything , now she discarded him like a tool after patiently sharing the fame with him all those years even refused to give him children for her selfish reasons, now he's swallowing the redpill at his old age, be very wary of so-called women that say they want to add to your mission but want to be treated like equals, it's not only promiscuous women you should be wary of but also masculine ambitious women who shun motherhood ( are not family oriented)

This was inevitable.

His books make it obvious that he idolizes his wife. It's always "Kim and I" this, "Kim and I" that. He pedestalizes her too much. Now, she thinks she's too good for him.

Plus, he seemed to have lost any sense of individual identity in their relationship. He's always attaching her to himself...in EVERYTHING. From his books, it seems even their businesses are completely intertwined.

Whenever I read his book, I always feared for his relationship. He's TOO proud of Kim. Plus, it looks like he doesn't hold anything back from her including all his business secrets.

I've not read any of Kim Kiyosaki's books but I'm certain there will be very few "Robert and I" in her books, if any.

I feel bad for Robert. The man is brilliant and he seems to genuinely love and respect his wife. Now, she's going to cart away half of his networth when they eventually finalize their divorce.

Enavie:
Hi guys.

Sometimes ago, I made up my mind to never get married. I just did not see any point in it, and this thread has shown me more reasons to not consider it.

However, I am starting to reconsider.

I am a person who takes their health very seriously. And of recent, something started to dawn on me: if I ever find myself in an emergency and do not have anyone around, this decision I am making could lead to my untimely death (Imagine collapsing while I am alone in the house. Imagine bed-ridden that I can not even stand to take care of myself). I have parents, brothers, and sisters, but considering some things that occurred recently, I would be very stupid to think I can rely on any of them. I feel, if I get a quite good girl (I feel some can still be managed) and play my game well, I may have someone who is going to love me so much that she would be willing to go through a great deal to provide the help I need during such periods.

I thought of having an assistant I am going to employ to help me in periods like this, but I do not think this option is reliable either. I do not think such a person would do a great job during those potentially tough times: it will be just a job to them.

I really do not want to get into a marriage, but at this point, I feel I do not have a choice.

I would like to hear what you guys think. Do you feel it is still a bad idea? If yes, let me in on your thoughts. Or do you know of another option I can consider?

This post shows you're still scared of death. Disavow yourself of such fears. Everybody dies. If you are religious, know that death will bring you closer to God. If you are an atheist, death is a blissful respite.

That said, here's how things are likely to play out in a medical emergency when you're married:

1. You collapse or convulse violently.
2. Your wife panicks and becomes paralyzed with fear.
3. Inaction or inefficient action of your wife as a result of her fear.
4. You die, anyway.

Or.

1. You collapse or convulse.
2. Your wife panicks.
3. But manages to contact the nearest man.
4. The man, ultimately, finds a way to save you.

Fact is, your wife is unlikely to be capable of saving you herself. A man is sure to come into the equation.

Now if you're going to be unmarried, simply skip the wife and go straight to the man in the equation. One way you can do this is to install an emergency alarm button in your own room with the blare in your security man's place.

Also, have a personal doctor. Have his number on a speed dial. Plus, a healthy lifestyle will reduce the incidences of such mishaps.

About being bedridden. You made a fallacious claim there when you said it'll just be a job to the person you'll employ as an assistant. It's more likely to be a burden to your wife and family who have to put their lives on hold to attend to you than to a person being paid to do so.

One million Americans are enrolled in assisted living. People who attend to them are trained to NOT make them appear as burdens. You can find a way to get a similar service wherever you live.

But keep in mind that no matter how much a wife loves you, you'll eventually become a heavy burden if she has to take care of you for an extended period of time without any reciprocity from your end. Ditto for some family members.

Your fears will be allayed when you become wealthy. Therefore, you owe it to yourself to be very wealthy.

Also consider the fact that HBP, stress and tension occasioned by your involvement in a marital union can be the catalyst for the emergencies you so fear.

That said, besides the infidelity, constant disrespect, unnecessary burdens and overall dearth of peace of mind that come with it, marriages in Nigeria are not so bad.

Skepticus
Pansophist

Thank you for your replies.

Quick question:

What do you guys think about using steroids in bodybuilding?

Pansophist
Skepticus

ProphetJeroboam:
Give me your top red pill movie character guys. Mine is Tommy Shelby from peaky blinders and Harvey Specter from suits. So far so good, Hollywood hasn’t ruined them completely yet.

Thomas Shelby is NOT a Red-pilled character.

He is merely cunning, ruthless and Machiavellian. Plus, he is very competent at what he does. Though these qualities can be an indication of TRP-awareness, they are not exclusive to TRP. Successful CEOs/entrepreneurs possess similar characteristics.

Now, back to why I said Thomas Shelby is not a Red-pilled character. He married a professional who.re (Lizzie). Not just any who.re, but the same who.re he prevented his brother from marrying.

He became a hoe's retirement plan. That's GROSSLY anti-TRP.

Oswald Mosley, on the other hand, could be considered a Red-pilled character.

Lightheaded:

Picks mic

Very valid. The rate at which Hollywood is feeding the audience that particular scenario you painted is bewildering. So bewildering I could predict the outcome of the "Cinderella" movie just from seeing the princess. One particular scene got me : when the queen complained about the king's throne a bit taller than hers, Omo I just left my friend to continue watching his movie, God forbid I watch trash.

That scene was to make the King seem immature and insecure. It's a jab at the Patriarchy. One of many, really.

That movie is full of overt attempts to propagate gynocentrism.

First, it attempts to exculpate the evil stepmother. A quick backstory shows how she was oppressed by the Patriarchy and had her dreams shattered. Hence, her bitter disposition. The conclusion being that it's NOT her fault she's the way she is. It's men's fault.


Then, there's also the Queen who yearns bitterly to ANTAGONIZE the King. She feels restricted by the King (Patriarchy). To her, freedom means being able to OPENLY contradict the King. In the presence of his subjects, no less.

In fact, she did exactly that. Towards the end of the movie, the King made some announcements in the presence of his gathered subjects. Then, the Queen took the podium and yelled "NO, YOU'RE WRONG." To the lackwit that wrote the story, that's a woman being strong and independent. Even though it was the King's status that gave her that platform in the first place.

Another thing to learn from the relationship between the King and Queen is the efficacy of the "you're no longer the man I married/you've changed" card. That card is the trump card of women. That card, applied with a strategic withdrawal of attention/affection, will make most men (especially married ones) simp hard.

The Queen used it on the King. It worked like magic. The King made a ridiculous spectacle of himself just to prove that he was still the same man she loved and married. It's a powerful ploy of women. Any blue-pilledman who has ever been on the receiving end can attest to that. The result is almost instantaneous. You'll immediately start evaluating yourself.

Then, there's the "fairy godmother" who was actually a gay black man. That part was just plain disgusting.

hazard7:
Daily Reminder:

In this age of feminism, we should mind the kinds of thing we hear, see and even read. There is a reason why we have so many boys in this our era than men and why there is so much low testerone and simp and soy boys everywhere.

Especially the movies we watch, A friend asked me to watch a tv series called "sex education" that it's redpilled as Bleep. So I jumped in and watched, I was angry at the nonchalant promotion of homosexuality and the rest but the fact they even came to Nigeria to act a particular scene in which they wanted Nigeria to adopt a law in favour of homosexuality and feminism.

I got pissed off and ask my friend what that was about, he said something that hit me. He said the whole purpose of the movie was to show me the "new" normal cause a storm is coming and it is only the trees that can adapt while remaining strong that can survive.

AUTHORITY: Watch what you watch cause a Tv is also a good weapon for brainwash if you know what I mean

This is very valid.

I don't subscribe much to conspiracy theories, but it is very evident that someone, or a group is someones, is using movies/shows to brainwash the public.

It became obvious with the homosexuality trope. It was weird the first time we saw it on TV. But now, it is expected.

The desensitisation of homesexuality through the use of movies and TV shows has been quite successful. Few people, if any at all, think it's weird anymore.

That said, writers of movies and shows seem to have a list of mandatory characters. The list includes:

1. A gay person (preferably male).
2. A black man.
3. A patriarchy-oppressed white woman (usually the lead).
4. A caricature of a masculine man.
5. A lovable doofus of a man.
6. A very powerful man whose balls are in the palm of a woman (wife/GF).
7. A strong, independent woman .
8. A transgender (EXCLUSIVELY a man turning into a woman. Women are already perfect just the way they are).

For these writers, finding a way to slot in a "black gay man" character is like hitting the jackpot. It makes them giddy with joy. A black transgender man? That's bliss!

That aside, there's a fairly new narrative that movies/shows are pushing now. Writers, or perhaps their sponsors, are catching on quickly. And it's gaining ground rapidly.

The narrative is this:

Men willfully relinquishing their rightful positions of leadership or authority to pursue love or a life of mediocrity and frivolities.

Of course, the narrative is fostered by conveniently making the men in the movie/show grossly incompetent and the women overwhelmingly competent.

Somehow, the women are natural-born leaders with huge ambitions and transformational ideas. Whereas for the men, leaders are just "not who they are."

First time I noticed the new narrative was in Coming 2 America. A poor bastard forfeited his throne to a natural female leader to pursue love with an ambitious lady. And that's okay?

The next time I noticed it was in Cinderella (2021) where the Crown Prince, who's conveniently made out to be incompetent and irresponsible, also forfeits his throne to his ambitious sister to pursue love with an equally ambitious girl whose ambitions require her to travel.

Avengers: Endgame was the next movie I saw with the narrative. Thor forfeiting the Asgardian Throne to a Valkyrie. In Norse mythology, the Valkyries are just servants of Odin. But it's okay to give up the throne to one of them and then go jostle for the leadership of a small space shuttle.

The objective of the narrative is simple:

It's okay to be unambitious as a man. Leave the leadership roles to women, they are more capable than you anyway.

If the propagation of the narrative continues, it'll become imprinted in the minds of men. Men will become more laid-back and unambitious than ever. Women will have the reins of society more firmly in their grasps.

Then HELL will reign on earth.

On movies:

Guys need to be ultra-careful on the kind of movies they watch. You see, human beings think in pictures. But those thoughts are usually tempered and filtered by the conscious effort of the person thinking the thoughts.

But with movies, your filter is bypassed. Whatever message the producers and sponsors of the movie want to pass is deposited DIRECTLY into your subconscious mind. Whether you like it or not.

You are effectively stripped of your choice.

As redpill-aware man, you might think that you are immune to whatever message is being passed. That may be true for some of the more obvious messages. But there are subtler ones that may end up being entrenched in your mind.

Consider the fact that 50 percent of what you watch get stored whereas only 10 percent of what we read is retained. So even if you continue to read TRP materials while you also watch largely Blue Pill movies, there's still a 40 percent advantage for the BP movie.

Isaacmacdon:

Damn!
No single atom of remorse here.

Isaacmacdon:
Here are excerpts from the thread.
Women will be the dearth of men.
Wake up!

You kings are sleeping.

More of this, sir.

Stories like these do as much good as a full book on TRP.

2dice01:
Best time to be a woman
You go just dey cashout like G.Boy
Since Guys are only reasoning with their Díck

I have this friend
She just got a self contain

She posted 3days ago she needs a Bed
One uncle paid Yesterday
She posted the cash/screenshot

Before you know house done full
After 2yrs
You will see caption like
Self made
Boss lady herself


Anyway
This morning

One terrible thing about this is that most men who pay bills for women, even ones they have no relationship with, actually feel good about doing it. It gives them a sense of fulfillment.

That's why it's so difficult for most men to stop simping. Men long to be useful, women provide that avenue for men. With the added bonus of "maybe" sex in the future.

So simping is a lot like killing two birds with a stone. First, you get to feel useful. Then, you get to join the "waiting list" for future access to pussy.

Simping is very logical when you look at it that way.

Even worse:

Some men finance for women a lifestyle they do not enjoy. For instance, the man who'll end up buying this lady a fan may be boiling alive in his own room.

But that's how men understand love: endless sacrifice. Until such men reform their thinking, they'll continue to be exploited. Pitilessly too.

Women are so fxcking smart when it comes to social engagements. That's why they almost exclusively solicit favours from men alone. They don't mess with each other. They fxck with men. Even for little things.

For instance, if a woman needs a favour. And a man and a woman are both in a position to grant that favour, the woman will almost ALWAYS approach the man for that favour. Even for little things like holding a purse while she adjusts one of the many ornaments she put on.

Yet, let an argument ensue.

Women will unfailingly take each other's side. Even when the man in the argument is trying to prove a point that'll favour one of the women.

It's just amazing!

SeekerofTruth1:
See what my childhood guy friend said to me on WhatsApp because of my [/b]regular Redpilled post on my status

He also blocked me too

This is a grave mistake.

Once exposed to TRP and the truths encoded therein, a lot of people act like a child with a new toy. They go about broadcasting it to whoever will listen. Interested or not.

Although this is understandable because TRP is knowledge that brings an unparalleled form of enlightenment. It makes you feel somehow superior and you just want to publicize it even if it's just to show that you know better.

But the fact is TRP is esoteric knowledge not meant, or even fit, for public consumption. It is infamous and anti-social. In fact, if everyone has access to TRP and proceed to practise it, it'll ruffle the fundamental fabrics of society. A society built on blue-pilled foundation will be destabilised by unsolicited exposure to TRP.

No one wants that.

Don't preach TRP.
Don't hurl it at people.

Only reveal it when they come searching earnestly for it. Even then, give them a soft landing. Perhaps with a book that doesn't even mention TRP but conveys TRP truths nonetheless. Esther Vilar's The Manipulated Man is ideal for this.

Blatantly uploading contents that hint at a red pill awareness on platforms where you have friends, colleagues, clients or relatives who suffer from chronic blue pill conditioning will win you no favours. It is more likely to make you lose valuable contacts/relationships.

In a blue-pilled world, TRP is abnormal and largely unwanted. Never talk about it. Never admit it to anyone. If someone even brings it up, your default response should be "what's that?"

The more red pilled you are, the more blue pilled you must appear to the public. Keep your knowledge to yourself and practise it in silence.

One of Robert Greene's wisdom:
LAW 38: Think as you like, but behave like others.

Recent posts on this thread show that most people are unwilling, and perhaps unable, to learn.

Someone on this thread was generous enough to recommend a great book - Sperm Wars. The book is a comprehensive manual on sex, sexual habits and sexual strategies.

That book especially gives invaluable insights into sexual strategies. All men should read and comprehend it.

Now, a guy on this thread posted a string of messages where he boldly told a woman how he wasn't ready to be a father yet...

And almost everyone came for his head. Funniest of all, some people dubbed him a "simp." Others claimed he's not a "true alpha male" and others said "that's not what red pill is about."

They are all full of sh1t.

First of all, if there's anything that the TRP is unequivocal about, it's PUTTING YOURSELF FIRST. In fact, that's the first few lessons you learn when you come in contact with TRP.

Now here's a man doing exactly that and he's being vilified. All because he's somehow violating the moral principles of some people. Moral principles that were painstakingly sculpted by a gynocentric society, I might add.

These outcries are vestiges of ingrained blue pill conditioning sealed deep where even daily exposure to TRP is yet to exorcise them.

The guy claims he's not ready yet and he's called irresponsible for his decision. Meanwhile, the lady in question seems to have a "serious BF" somewhere else while still fxcking another man raw.

Plus, abortion is ALWAYS an option. Especially when the pregnancy results from casual sex. Religion is obviously NOT an excuse here since the girl is already fxcking outside marriage and possibly double dating.

So if she's keeping it, she'd better take responsibility for the baby.

By the way, women are not called "Gatekeepers of Sex" for no reason. They are the Gatekeepers because they decide whether sex is going to happen or not.

If they decide whether sex is going to happen or not; they automatically decide whether baby is going to follow or not. If they decide that a baby will follow, then it is expected that they have a way to cater for the baby already.

Women as the Gatekeepers have to take responsibility for the offspring that results from a sexual congress they authorized.

Responsibility for offsprings is NOT a man's duty, it's a woman's. Marriage conveniently turns the equation on its head. But marriage is not an evolved phenomenon, it's conditioned by society.

Women, of course, are aware of this reality - that responsibility for the offsprings rests on them. That's why female sexual strategy are so BRUTAL and UNFORGIVING.

They are very quick to get hitched to a beta PROVIDER that guarantees provisioning that'll give their offsprings the best chance of survival. They'd also never hesitate to fxck an ALPHA who'll provide the best genes that also improve the survival chances of their offsprings.

The strategy emanates from a deep-seated understanding that responsibility for offsprings rests on them.

This is an unbelievably effective strategy.

Women are confident that the beta PROVIDER will raise the offsprings whether they are his or not because he's a GOOD DOG of the society. Thus, he does what the society tells him to do. But the Alpha, not so much.

Now, I'm not saying that ALL fathers are betas. All I'm saying is that no one should EVER blame a man who makes it clear that he's not ready to raise a kid.

By the way, there are undeniable genetic benefits to impregnating ladies and letting betas raise them. But they'll not be coming from me.

Read SPERM WARS.

That said, whenever someone says:

"A true redpiller..."
"A real Alpha Male..."

Remember this age-old line:

"A real man..."

And tell them to SHOVE IT!

Let no one define what Alpha Male, Masculinity or being RedPilled means.
Define it for yourself. That's the whole point for being unplugged from the Matrix.

To think for yourself. With your own brain.

If you must follow any definition of what Alpha Male, Masculinity or being RedPilled means, leth this be it:

To thine own self, BE TRUE.

Savagethe21st:
N*gga happy that his wife's breast was sucked during a truth or dare.

You cannot really fault the man. He has been conditioned by society that tolerating the excesses of females is a sign of maturity. Especially, when it seems like it has something to do with her "career."

To his own understanding, he's being a supportive husband. He probably expects accolades from the rest of society for allowing his wife to enter the house of fornication.

Vecto:
Can I build muscles without eating meat?



pan.sophist

Pending Pansophist's reply, here are some things to keep in mind:

New muscles are built when current ones are destroyed. Lifting weights, or heavy objects in general, accelerates the process of destruction.

Once the current ones are destroyed, new ones take their place. And with the right diet, the new ones are bigger and stronger.

The right diet here will mostly depend on your goal for lifting weights - mass or aesthetics/definition- and body type.

That said, your diet must always contain some forms of protein. Not necessarily MEAT. Fish, beans, crayfish, eggs, etc will do just fine.

So the answer to your question is YES. You can build wonderful muscles without eating meat.

A lot of people fail to grasp the power of ignoring an unreasonable person.

It's a powerful skill that everyone should learn. You give a nuisance more power by acknowledging its existence. That acknowledgement is like oxygen to an entity like that.

Someone comes here to talk about how a religion that encourages men to blow themselves up for the hope of getting everlasting access to 72 virgin pussies is naturally RedPilled... And people are engaging him.

Not cool.

Learn to ignore nuisances into oblivion.

Over.

Over

Orpazpjr:



Cold world!!

I once asked and still am curious, will a lady Cheat on a HVM?? I mean you get all of your shit together , what will still make her cheat??

No! A woman will NEVER cheat on a HVM with a substantial level of fame, wealth and social status. She can only engage in ENTANGLEMENTS.

A lot of people seem to have completely missed the point of being a HVM in relation to the sexual market. You see, being a HVM is not an insulation against the innate disposition of the female folks. It merely allows you to take advantage of the system.

Understanding the nature of women is a lot like understanding the laws of physics. With sufficient knowledge in physics, you can design things that'll take the advantage of the laws...not negate them.

For instance, aeroplanes fly in the sky because they are designed to take advantage of the laws of physics. Rockets are launched into space because they take even better advantage of the same laws.

In the same way, a man who has made something of himself soars high above those who exist on the plane of mediocrity. He's more attractive to women because he represents security, provision and status.

But the fact remains that if a rocket - person who's somehow perceived to be of a higher value - comes along, he'll be more attractive to women than the aeroplane man - who's a HVM in his own right.

By the way, no matter how high value you are, there's always someone higher. If not on a comprehensive level, then in some singular aspect. It's the way of the world.

And that's why I love TRP. It teaches you NOT to bust your ass off trying to be a HVM just so you can attract women. Rather it encourages you to bust your ass off FOR YOU!

So being a HVM does not mean a woman won't cheat on you. It just means you'll have more options. So if one acts up, you don't go moping around blue-balled and brokenhearted.

DEMZEE:


Lol

I'm still waiting for someone to counter my patriarchal stance though

We are just filled with feminized men who camouflage as redpillers sha especially in this thread

You seem to have failed to realise that no one is interested in vilifying you for wanting to be a Patriarch.

I suppose that's because you see every other man who doesn't follow your path as weak and feminized. Yet, one could argue that you are the one with a robust level of feminine energy.

As a Patriarch, your goal probably centers on controlling your wives and kids with iron hand. You want to do this in order to show that you're comfortable with authority and you have a solid frame.

In short, you see Patriarchy as the essence of a high value man. Everyone else is low value and beta.

Your argument is laughable. Here's why:

You see, women and kids are very easy to dominate and control. It's even easier when they are yours. Despite the perennial decadence, society still expect them to accord you with some measure of respect.

And frankly, all men cherish respect. It's why there's a well-defined hierarchy in the world of men.

That said, a Patriarch can easily get his own dose of respect from his wives and children. And he feels like a king. But the reality is that they (his wives and kids) are OBLIGATED to respect him. Therefore, the value of that respect is tainted.

Plus, the only way to guarantee the continuous flow of that respect is by PROVIDING sufficiently for those you lord it over. Fail to do that and you can kiss your title of a Patriarch goodbye.

On the other hand, men who have no interest in being a Patriarch will have to get their respect somewhere else - amongst other men. In the world of men, you need to PRY your own share of respect from their hands. Because they aren't obligated to give you sh1t - unlike your wives and kids.

The only way to get respect among men is through competence and a life of genuine value. This is more difficult than you can possibly imagine.

Any fool can be a Patriarch. But it takes grit and drudgery to carve out a place for yourself in the world of other men.

A refusal to partake in Patriarchy is not a refusal of the burden of performance. It's a refusal to be saddled with the burden of performing for the benefits of others (wives and kids) even when it does not align with your OWN goals.

Senselessly berating people who want nothing to do with Patriarchy is a sign of supreme ignorance.

You see, the reality is that a RedPilled Patriarch is more often than not inferior to a RedPilled Non-Patriarch. This is the fact simply because the Patriarch works for his wives and kids. He acts in ways that'll secure their continuous respect. A series of burden that a Non-Patriarch does not share.

.

.

.

.

.