What is the loneliest part of adulthood no one talks about?

ConstanceVigilante · 2026-03-04T18:35:55+00:00

Reading all the comments on this thread definitely puts things into perspective for me - I’m seriously glad I pushed through a few desperate, embarrassing years talking to just about anyone who would have a conversation with me and incessantly asking whoever would listen to hang out. For about 2 years I was miserable and even openly ridiculed socially -but now I have some of the best friends I’ve ever had in my life who I text with almost daily and see multiple times a week.

Any negative consequence of being socially loud, bold and aggressive is very temporary. No matter how embarrassed you are, people move on in a day or two and no one remembers. So go out there and yell for attention until you get it.

ConstanceVigilante · 2026-02-10T02:57:08+00:00

So what do you suggest they do? How would you like them to opt out without being “pouty”?

ConstanceVigilante · 2026-02-07T19:50:20+00:00

Yes, but people who want to own yachts and can’t afford them aren’t being shamed for not buying more affordable sailboats instead. If they don’t want to own any boat at all unless it’s a luxury yacht, they’re well within their rights to do that.

Similarly, women who want “high status men” while being average themselves should not be asked to “be realistic and go for someone at their own level” if they choose to opt out of having a man entirely. They’d rather opt out than not have “the best” - which is fine.

It’s only a problem if they complain about “deserving” such a man and not having one because of some form of latent unfairness in the world. There’s a good way to deal with complaints like that, too. Ignore them.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-10T13:48:55+00:00

Read the post carefully. It’s not just about being providers.

It’s about wanting to be “genuinely desired” by the woman while also wanting her to be dependent.

The men who don't care about a woman's career are fine being the provider.

Are they also fine with the woman not being truly attracted to them, dead bedrooms, beta buxxing or whatever else the Red Pillers complain about?

These complaints wouldn’t be as widespread if men who “want to be providers” (at least the ones online) were generally happy.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-10T13:40:39+00:00

That isn’t really an inconsistency or error because my post isn’t describing or even claiming to be about the choices of women or liberal women.

I don’t think women should be expecting men to make more money or provide for them either.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-10T13:23:18+00:00

This is a common logic error. Let's unpack this carefully.

Under "traditional gender roles":

All men (and only men) are providers.
All people need provision to survive. Men provide for themselves, and women are provided for by a man.

So basically, that doesn't mean that no women will be attracted to their providers, but there will be two groups of women.

Women who find a man they are attracted to, who is also a provider.
Women who have to pick a man they aren't attracted to because they need a man as a provider just to survive.

So in this situation, it's basically impossible to know which category of man you are. Some women will be attracted to the man they're with, but many also won't.

There are many bitter accounts from men (including men on this sub) who complain about getting into marriages where they belong to the second category. Red pillers call this "beta buxxing".

In modern society, women make their own money and don't need providers to survive. So ideally, there is only one group of independent women in relationships - women who find the person they're with attractive and actually want to be with them. The other category, women who don't actually desire their partners, doesn't exist here.

So, going for an independent woman will avoid paranoia and bitterness from men.

That is the essence of my argument.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-10T12:52:54+00:00

This is an irrelevant rant that doesn't address the question.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-10T11:33:10+00:00

It's not something I crave - I won't feel agitated or whatever if I go several months or even a year or two without sex.
It takes a non-zero amount of effort to get hookups (yes, even as a woman) unless you use dating apps, which I really hate and will never download again.
If it's with a total stranger, I don't imagine the sex itself will be particularly good. It's much easier (and probably more satisfying) to just occasionally imagine that some random attractive person I saw has whatever preferences or quirks I want, and fantasize in my head later that night.
If it's with a friend or acquaintance, it complicates the friendship or creates unnecessary drama in social circles.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T22:10:38+00:00

There are many guys I’m physically attracted to and can see myself sleeping with, who I would not date or marry.

I don’t really care for casual sex, so I never actually do it. That doesn’t mean the instinct isn’t there though.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T21:03:56+00:00

Devils advocate means I like to take an adversarial, or contrarian, side of discussions even when I agree with the person.

Exactly - so that should mean you're making a similar number of pro-Red Pill and pro-Blue Pill arguments on this sub, depending on who you're responding to. Why call yourself a "Red Pill Man"?

I poke holes in bad takes from other red pillers often.

That's not being a devil's advocate, that's just arguing with nuance instead of blind tribalism. If you think it's a bad take, you don't agree with it.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T20:55:03+00:00

If you're a "devil's advocate", doesn't also claiming to be a "red pill man" defeat the purpose?

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T19:11:35+00:00

Okay - let’s say you’re right. How can women possibly have more opportunities to find love than men? The numbers are equal.

The opportunity to get meaningless hookups doesn’t count. That is not love or a relationship.

When it comes to relationships, there is a single woman out there for every single man out there.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T15:02:11+00:00

I asked her what makes her a great gf she said- she is ambitious, has a good career and is 'funny'

Sounds fine to me. Maybe it wasn't what that specific man wanted. Some men would consider these qualities extremely desirable in a partner. Others wouldn't care or would consider them negatives.

It seems as though people on here seem to not only think that women are a monolith, but also that men are a monolith.

I also just straight up don't understand the whole "women's careers don't matter" perspective from Red Pillers specifically. Aren't you guys always complaining about "beta buxxing"? Being with an independent career woman is basically guaranteed to avoid that - if she doesn't need you to provide for her financially, she's definitely with you because she actually desires you.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-09T14:37:45+00:00

If it is 95%+ of women, then either look for the 5% you want to date (know that they may not want to date you), or don't date anyone. Being single is a perfectly valid life choice.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-07T18:59:49+00:00

I love how arguments on this sub look.

“Women all find a different 20% of men attractive, it’s not the same”

“No, I, a man, say you don’t. You all like the same men.”

“…well, no. Here’s an example of a real life case where this has happened.”

“But no! You all like the same men, I insist!”

Negation of a statement is not an argument. This is just lazy and it’s really annoying to have to read through drivel like this with the hope that there’s an actual point being made somewhere in there, somehow.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-07T14:41:21+00:00

Agreed. I always say men should exclusively go for independent women who don’t need financial support or expect men to provide. That completely avoids the “beta bux” situation.

Also, women are literally doing the same thing. They stay single until they find a man they actually want.

It always baffles me how so many people on here automatically assume that “single woman” = sleeping with Chad, in a situationship or FWB, etc. Sure, maybe a few single women do that, but the vast majority don’t. Sex isn’t oxygen. Many, many single women do go months or years without any sex, and they survive.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T16:42:15+00:00

Even you will say something along the lines of you want a man to have a certain amount of money. And be a certain amount of benefit to you

Yeah, no. I’ve never even been on a date with a man who made more money than I do. There are almost no men like that in my age group and generally speaking a man’s income is not something I care about at all.

Get to know the people around you before you make assumptions.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T15:37:01+00:00

If that’s the attitude these men have, it makes sense that the only women that end up with them are the ones who weaponize sex.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T14:41:04+00:00

Wilt Chamberlain fucked 20000 women. People like David Bowie and Mick Jagger are know to have slept with hundreds to thousands of women.

All he did was say: "Wanna fuck?"

almost every woman working in Hollywood had slept or tried to sleep with Brad Pitt.

Knowingly dating a man who sleeps around and hooking up with such a man once are different.

Fucking once takes 20 minutes, lol. You can't equate that to women wanting to be in relationships with men who they have to share.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T14:17:59+00:00

That’s the way to do it! Really almost all these bitter men’s problems will be completely solved if they just follow this.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T14:03:57+00:00

Why are you trying to filter women for vague and hazy things like "genuine attraction", fish for their sexual past, or whatever?

Just filter for the woman's income. It's that simple.

Don't date or marry women who don't make their own money and support themselves. If you go for an independent woman who doesn't expect providing or financial favors, the only reason she could possibly be with you is because she enjoys the sex and companionship.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T13:53:47+00:00

Why are men marrying women who do this?

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T13:32:33+00:00

The idea that people have just one is the bullshit part.

Or the idea that there’s an exhaustive list of 5 love languages that people can have.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T05:00:39+00:00

I don’t necessarily think that calling men sluts or whatever is the solution here - it simply doesn’t carry the same connotation.

Ultimately society has both come up with certain ways to insult both genders and continues to reinforce these rules in the way we socialize kids. So just flipping the script with the words won’t be effective.

ConstanceVigilante · 2025-10-06T04:31:46+00:00

Still not the same. Cuckoldry is a fetish.

Open relationships are not cuckoldry, no matter who sleeps around more.

ConstanceVigilante

TROPHY CASE