I know. Boobs.
If finding a good Mrs. is important to you, though, then sifting out the wheat from the chaff is essential, and identifying potential relationship disasters before they happen is vital, no matter how big the rack. And if you aren't inclined to search for a foreign bride from a more traditionally-minded country, then pay careful attention to these key phrases and actions. Consider them Red Pill Alerts. When you hear them, they are indicators of red flags that should give you pause.
1. "Rape Culture"
If a woman uses this term in casual conversation, end the conversation at the earliest possible moment and do your best to avoid her in the future. This phrase is used as a blanket term by feminism for describing all male sexuality, far in excess of the actual crime of rape. Use of this term indicates that a woman is suspicious and fearful of male sexuality, even if she finds herself attracted to it. That's not to say that women who use the term aren't themselves drawn to strong male sexual displays, despite their political protests to the contrary, but it is also indicative of her level of respect for male sexuality in general.
Porn is "rape culture" to these women. So is the music video and lyrics for this summer's pop R&B hit "Blurred Lines", because it expresses raw masculine sexuality unapologetically. Women who use the term "rape culture" casually are giving you a shit test, whether they understand it as such or not. By using it they are challenging your sexuality. But the only proper response to a shit test is to ignore it. And her. A woman who uses this term does not respect men or their sexuality, and you can expect some rocky times ahead if you ignore this Red Pill Alert and plow ahead.
Good response: "You know, I think I'll go talk to some women who actually like men." LEAVE
Better response: "*Snort* What, are you eleven or something? Time to find some grown-up girls." LEAVE
Best Response: "I've always preferred my victims to have bigger tits." LEAVE
2. "Delicate Male Ego"
Another shit test. When a woman uses this term, she's deliberately challenging you and your response to her. She's thinking she's displaying her strength and independence. What she's actually doing is revealing her contempt for masculinity and her ignorance of its subtleties. Yes, dudes, we have subtleties.
The male ego is oft bashed, particularly by ignorant feminists, because they really do lack any clear understanding or insight into it, insisting solipsistically that men should behave the way women do. By implying anything about a man's ego without understanding it, they are betraying their inner frustrations with male-female relations, frustrations that are likely to blossom into brutal, heated arguments or even infidelity in a relationship. A woman who throws around "delicate male ego" is calling herself out as being disrespectful of masculinity in general.
Sure, women don't like to see weakness or other BETA traits in a man . . . but men don't like to be reminded that we have those weaknesses, and a woman with the tactlessness to mention any man's ego to another is one to watch out for. She might be a High Alpha female with exceptionally grand tastes . . . or she might be a scornful Gamma woman who thinks she can verbally abuse a man and expect him to find her attractive.
Either way, the wise Red Pill man will step around this indelicate flower and pursue worthier women. Women who understand that verbally kicking all men in the balls is not the best way to find a worthy man. Indeed, by calling out all men's egos, she's demonstrated herself as poor wife material.
Good response: "My delicate male ego is going to go talk to the pretty girls, now. Thanks for the fluff, Cupcake." LEAVE
Better response: "My ego isn't delicate. It's just highly discriminating." LEAVE
Best response: (LOUDLY) "Why no, I don't think you need a boob job! A lot of guys like it when one is so much smaller than the other! You shouldn't be so sensitive!" LEAVE
3. "I deserve . . ."
Women who talk about what they deserve -- in work, in life, in romance, and especially in a man -- are best avoided as poor wife material. Feminine entitlement is frequently a problem in a relationship, as women rationalize just what they "deserve", usually without much in the way of supporting data.
My ex sister-in-law is a case in point. She left my brother and her son to go shack up with a richer dude because she "deserved to have nice things in her life and a man who can provide them". This brutal assertion had no evidence to back up the claim that she deserved any such thing. Indeed, if she actually got what she deserved, I don't think she'd be bragging about it. In a way she did -- her new dude dumped her two months later, after he tired of her, and now she lives with her parents and her daughter from another relationship and her grandson . . . because the nut doesn't fall far from the tree.
Women who use this term almost uniformly DON'T deserve whatever it is they think they do. A lot of the dichotomy between male and female ideas on the subject of entitlement are due, I believe, to the fact that women get handed the bulk of their sexual capital early, while men must earn theirs slowly and painfully. That gives women an incentive to indulge in this kind of entitlement. If you encounter a woman who uses "I deserve . . ." you can bet that she's going to deserve a second husband someday. Avoid.
A woman with good wife potential won't discuss what she deserves; she'll discuss what she aspires to and what she hopes for . . . and most importantly, what she's willing to earn.
Good response: "And I deserve a more interesting conversational companion. Have a good evening." LEAVE
Better response: "On what basis do you deserve that? Oh, wait, I'm not that interested." LEAVE
Best resposne: "And I deserve a blowjob in the parking lot. We gonna help each other out?" LEAVE . . . FAST (or get a blowjob in the parking lot, if things go that route).
4. "I don't believe in marriage . . ."
This is such utter hamstereese bullshit that it should be sold by the pound. Despite all the rationalization in the feminist media about how their thrilling careers and corporate ambitions are personally as fulfilling as a solid loving relationship and a family, the Red Pill fact of the matter is that MOST women believe in marriage. Declaring that they don't, especially on short acquaintance, is a clear sign of one of two things: either she is so commitment-phobic that she will leave you for the next pair of pecs to ponder her panties, or she is clearly bullshitting because getting married is on her mind so much that she's desperate. They're playing to the well-touted idea that men are the ones who don't want marriage, and think that by declaring their lack of desire to commit they are making themselves more attractive.
To a certain extent they are correct . . . but they are also setting themselves up for disappointment or duplicity, and either way a wise man will avoid them. A good future wife isn't going to sell the idea of matrimony short -- she's going to protect it like a cherished treasure. Declaring that she doesn't believe in marriage is probably the best indicator that she's either working an angle to lure you into one while you're looking at her boobs or she's been so badly hurt that her long-term prospects are tainted. Move along, there's nothing to see here.
Good response: "That's too bad. I do. I think she does, too. I think I'll go talk to her." LEAVE
Better response: "I think some people are just destined to be alone for their entire lives, until they die alone and forgotten. Thankfully, I'm not one of them." LEAVE
Best response: "That's a relief! I don't either. That's what gives me the mental clarity I need to sleep with as many women as possible behind my wife's back." LEAVE
5. "I want to work on my career . . ."
Hell, any mention of her career or job, outside of the basics, is a Red Pill alert.
That's not to say you should be looking for a woman with no career prospects, it just means that a woman who sees herself as a professional first will only see herself as a wife and mother second. That's great, for some women. After all, with fewer men working these days, it's going to require a lot of women filling the taxation gap, so that their brilliant careers can subsidize other women's children in the future.
But you should not reward such dedication to a job with your allegiance or commitment. Because talking about her job is probably the best way she can let you know that you, regardless of what a worthy dude you might be, are going to stand in the shadow of her aspirations. Feminists and ignorant dating advice columnists call this "being threatened by her success", and treat it with scorn. They see things in terms of competition between men and women, with the women aspiring to elevate themselves to "respectability" in society's eyes through their dedication to their job.
But do you really want to marry a woman who will leave your ass if she gets transferred to California for "a golden opportunity"? Either you are her "golden opportunity" or you need to find someone who sees that. A good wife cannot be a _____________ first and a wife second. If her career is more important than making a life with you, or even going to be challenging to your relationship, then move along to more fulfilling prospects. The "strong, independent career woman" tends to be abysmally poor wife material.
Again, that isn't to say you want a woman who can't earn a living for herself. Unless she's a gorgeous nymphomaniac, an expectation of you to financially support her is likewise a Red Pill Alert. You can expect demands for alimony in your future. But find a woman who is willing to be devoted to her man and her family, not her job. Jobs come and go. Careers rise and fall. Marriage should be more durable than an employment contract . . . and if she doesn't agree, then she's self-selected out of the pool of potential good wives.
Good response: "Wow. Your parents must be very proud. I'm sure they've got your resume in a frame where they expected to put pictures of grandchildren." LEAVE
Better response: "I like strong and independent career women. I expect I'll have plenty of them working for me and my wife some day." LEAVE
Best response: "Unless you work in a strip club, I'm gonna go focus my energies on the girls whose ambitions are longer and harder than yours, if you know what I mean." LEAVE
6. "Why can't guys just . . . ?"
This is an expression that clearly predicates ignorant male-bashing. In most cases women do know why guys can't just ______________. They just don't like the answer, and want someone to change it for them.
A woman who has so little knowledge and experience with men as to not understand their basic motivations (Sex, food, shelter, entertainment, companionship, in that order) is an unwise choice. A woman who is so willing to express her ignorance so quickly is announcing herself as a future ex-girlfriend, if not a future ex-wife. Women who use this phrase are taking issue with the entire masculine experience. They are insisting on measuring the men they meet against a yardstick used for women. They are virtually screaming that they are going to question your motives and motivations and express dismay, contempt, and resentment when there's a future issue in your relationship.
Avoid this woman. If she can't figure out why guys like pretty girls, sports cars, beer and baseball -- or she actually feels a burning desire to know why -- then this woman is not going to be a good relationship risk.
Good response: "Because we're not chicks." LEAVE
Better response: "You know, I'm kind of insulted by that question. Ask yourself this: why can't guys just listen to my stupid bullshit instead of leaving me to talk to prettier and more interesting girls? Discuss." LEAVE
Best response: "Because we have penises. Want me to show you mine?" LEAVE
Yep. Pretty much any mention of feminism in a positive light, beyond the basics of equity feminism, is a Red Pill Alert for stormy seas ahead. Women who invoke feminism are shit testing you. Women who self-declare as feminists are challenging your masculinity right up front, and no clearer sign of a life of torment and abuse in a relationship with them is available. No more should be needed . . . but some dudes think they can either "tame" a feminist (and it can be done) or that they can use her feminism against her to drop her panties (which is done with such frightening regularity it's humorous).
Feminism is a danger sign. I haven't been able to find any official facts-n-figures on the subject, by my apocryphal, unscientific study into the manner is telling. Of the 37 self-declared feminists in the Womens' Studies Club of my university who graduated the same year I did, after 20 years their numbers are telling, as my alumni association has it. Fifteen never married. Of the 22 who did, 18 were divorced. Eleven had two or more divorces under their belt.
As I said, that's apocryphal, observational data without scientific merit. But it's also enlightening. That means that only 4 out of 37 feminists in my class managed to get married and stay married. That's just around 10%.
Which means, anecdotally, that marrying a feminist gives you roughly an 80% chance of getting divorced. Not the comfortably awful 50-50 coin flip of most marriages, but eight times out of ten saying "I do" to a feminist is going to lead to divorce, by my calculations. If folks have real data on this, I'd love to hear it, but feminism is decidedly NOT a precursor to a happy, fulfilled marriage. And a self-declared feminist has embraced the idea that a feminist can be anything she wants to be . . . except a good wife.
So listen to them. Don't marry them. Don't even fuck them. It's just too dangerous, and you do your fellow men a discourtesy by encouraging them.
Good response: " . . . " LEAVE
Better response: "I'm sorry, did you say something, Cupcake? I was staring at your boobs." LEAVE
Best response. "I like feminists. I can usually talk them into a little bi-sexual exploration, if you know what I mean. They love bullshit like that." LEAVE
8. "Men feel threatened and intimidated by me."
A woman who honestly believes this is confused or has a couple of hamsters in her bra. No matter how loudly she protests the contrary, most men don't feel "intimidated" by her. Most men are merely annoyed by her, and she chooses to see that as "intimidation", because that little rationalization means it's THEIR fault, not hers. Behold the power of hamsterization.
The fact is, men are intimidated by beautiful women . . . period. A powerfully attractive woman who understands she's attractive and knows how to turn that into incredible social capital very rightly intimidates the lesser men among us. She is Alpha, and she is searching for a stronger Alpha, and most dudes just aren't going to measure up.
But be "intimidated" merely by a woman's intelligence and ambition? Not so much.
Many otherwise intelligent women make this mistake, dismissing a snub or a lack of attention as the result of the men around her being "intimidated". In fact, it's likely that she's just annoyingly direct, argumentative, and bossy . . . not the sort of thing you want to cuddle up to after a three-hour cunnilingus marathon. These women mistake their clumsy social stumbling as being "strong and independent", and then fault the men around them for not being attracted to them.
These are the same women who feel that they are in a perpetual competition with men -- it's always 'us' vs. 'them' in their minds, an eternal struggle that they are determined to 'win'. They feel intimidation, usually in the workplace, and they respond how they feel the workplace demands: with hardcore competitive drive.
That's great if you're on the same sales team. It's lousy if you want a happy marriage.
That stumps a lot of women who just don't get this subtle fact of male sexual psychology: the vast majority of men don't want to fight with their wives for the rest of their lives, and a woman who is willing to argue about stupid stuff to demonstrate her intellectual superiority to the man in her life is ultimately going to shit test her way out of a relationship. Not because her dude feels "threatened". Because her dude feels marginalized and diminished for being forced to compete with the woman who is supposed to be a loving support.
A woman who claims men are intimidated by her is almost always a poor matrimonial risk, and she's going to be trouble in even a casual relationship. Her unwillingness to acknowledge the idea that in the romantic realm competition should be with other women FOR men, not AGAINST the men, is the keystone in her temple of solipsism. She walks around with a chip on her shoulder, demanding masculine prerogatives without accepting masculine responsibilities . . . and then wants to be valued for whatever shreds of femininity she has left.
The "intimidation" that these women feel they exude is mere bossiness. Men don't like bossy wives, in general, and therefore a woman who feels "intimidating" is self-selecting out of your marriage pool. That's not to say that intelligence and ambition aren't factors in the equation -- I found Mrs. Ironwood's ability to demonstrate her great intelligence one of the things most attractive about her. Thing was . . .
. . . she didn't feel like she had to beat me over the head with it. As Vox has recently stated, "The fact that a man is capable of having a substantive intellectual discussion with a woman doesn't mean he wants to do so every time he makes a simple observation." Intelligence is a valued factor in a wife . . . but so is the social understanding to know when displaying that intelligence will be seen in a negative light. Thinking that the dude who you just crushed in the monthly sales contest is going to like and respect you for your victory is foolishly ignorant of a woman: she simply cannot earn the same kind of masculine respect a man's male peers would, in the same situation.
And even if he does show that he respects your intelligence and your acumen, your drive and ambition . . . that doesn't mean he wants to have to face that challenge every day for the rest of his life. A man wants to come home to comfort and security after a hard day's struggle, not face an even fiercer competition that he cannot hope to win at home. So when a woman mentions that men seem intimidated by her, and she's not drop-dead gorgeous, pay the bar tab and move on. This one is trouble. She's not threatening, she's just really obnoxious and annoying . . . and doesn't have the sense to recognize it.
Good response: "I can see why." LEAVE.
Better response: "You poor girl. How awful for you. Count me among them." LEAVE
Best response: "Intimidated? By you? Miss Bossypants? That's HILARIOUS!" LEAVE . . . laughing.
9. "Women can do everything just as well as a man can."
Men and women have traditionally sub-specialized in various tasks as our society has progressed through various economic fields. The roles have changed as the economy has -- I rarely make Mrs. Ironwood go out and glean the wheat fields or field dress and skin a deer -- but the fact of gender specialization has remained constant. Men and women do different tasks, in general, because men and women are different. We have different goals, aspirations, measures of success, drives and ambitions. We have different strengths and weaknesses. We have different areas of interest.
The problem with the idea that "women can do everything just as well as a man can" is that it encourages the idea that the same abilities necessarily stem from the same font of motivations. For instance, a woman who enrolls in an all-male workout group just to prove that she can work at the same level as the men can isn't demonstrating her competence . . . she's demonstrating her willingness to mess with your masculinity.
I'm happy to admit that there are some tasks that women, in general, are just better at. Networking, likewise. Most social situations, actually. But the belief that women are equally equipped and educated for any given task as well as a man is can be poison to a relationship. I've also noted how short-lived this is once a couple is wed, too. It seems within months of the wedding, the number of things a new bride can do - even if she's the same gender as she was before the ceremony - drops dramatically as she basks in the accomplishment of her marriage. She no longer needs to prove that women can do everything just as well as a man can. She has a husband to take care of that now.
But gods help you if that poor schmuck is you. You just bit into a massive shit test. The proper response was a bold retreat. This woman is NOT wife material.
Good response: "Really? Then you don't mind giving me a few pointers on lactation, for instance -- I suck at it." LEAVE (while her eyes glaze over)
Better response: "Yeah, Cupcake, show me your draft card, THEN I'll take you seriously." LEAVE
Best response: "Are you ready to prove it? Otherwise, shut the hell up about it. That's what I'd say to a man." LEAVE
10. "I don't need a man."
Marriage is a partnership -- that much hasn't changed. While the specifics and the conditions have changed around, that much hasn't changed across history, economies, or cultures. We get married because we have a need to -- economic, sexual, social, or personal -- and we need to fulfill that need. Just because I can masturbate doesn't mean I don't need a woman as a sex partner. Just because Mrs. Ironwood can now cook doesn't mean she doesn't need a man as a husband. People in general are interdependent, particularly in the institution of marriage.
When a woman proudly proclaims her independence in these terms, she is revealing her attitude toward men and marriage in general, right on the box. Few couples who have been married longer than 10 years will say that kind of bullshit, because they have established that yes, indeed, part of them DOES need to be married. That's not to say you can't survive without a man, obviously, but making your lack of need known so early and so proudly demonstrates that a woman does not understand what marriage truly entails.
Often a woman proclaiming her independence in this manner is actually thinking she's making herself more attractive, not the target of the pump-and-dump humpsters. The thing is, the kind of man she most hopes to attract is likely to be appalled by such a declaration and the wise ones will quietly move on. Declaring your independence from needing a relationship isn't a statement of strength to a man, as are most of these Red Pill Alerts it's a defiant and insulting attempt to emasculate.
Stay the hell away from her. She's trouble.
A wife who doesn't need her husband won't have him long. Without a compelling reason -- besides love -- for them to stay together, the odds say (and Married Game backs up) that a marriage will implode or explode, depending upon the principals. Wiser couples tend to realize that men in relationships need to be needed, and wise women allow themselves to express that need in a way he can accomodate. A man who doesn't feel useful in a relationship will find someplace where he can feel useful, if he is any kind of quality at all.
It's not an admission of incompetence to admit you need a man in your life, ladies. It's an expression of general desire that men find hopeful. "I don't need a man" is essentially your declaration that your heart is closed to the prospect of a real union, in favor of the roommates-with-slowly-decreasing-benefits model that feminists are trying to pass off as happy marriages these days. Feminists see any other admission than "I don't need a man" as a capitulation to the stereotype of feminine weakness, and have spent the last 40 years attempting to ensure that their daughters, indeed, won't need a man when they grow up.
Of course, now that many of them have grown up . . . they discover that while they may not need a man, they want one more than the breath of life. Yet they can't understand why their declarations of independence and strength aren't getting the dudes lining up any faster than when she kept mentioning her resume.
Good response: "Oh, thank goodness - we were starting to think you weren't going to leave without one tonight. I'll spread the word that we're safe." LEAVE
Better response: "I just wanted to thank you on behalf of all the men in the room." LEAVE
Best response: "Don't worry, Cupcake -- with an attitude like that, you're in no danger of getting one."
So there you go, fellas: ten Red Pill Alert danger signs that the woman you are talking to is NOT wife material. There are others, and more subtle signs indicating more insidious dangers, but if you pay attention and raise a red flag on the play when you hear one of these statements, you will save yourself a tremendous amount of grief with your future wife.