Red women: Respect

[integral]

I've noticed certain women who'll only date a certain type of man because they're in a state where they have to respect whoever's speaking, and if they don't, they get highly disagreeable in the relationship. They're even self-aware about it. They know they need a man who can "put them in their place". So the word I've given this is "respect-oriented." They view the world through respect, it's an emotional inner locus, and if they don't hold you in high enough regard they won't let you lead them. They'll only accept a leader they respect and resist anyone who isn't, to the end.

And the sexual attraction system is tied into it. They can't be attracted to a man they don't respect enough, they're hypersensitive to the whole concept, and it's all rooted in their internalized structure of what makes them respect a man versus not. So they end up only dating black guys, because a black guy's appearance is as naturally more on the bad-boy spectrum of ruggedness and masculinity, deeper voice, relax don't give a shit, just by being black, and they'll only go for a certain height and build, men with these superficial masculine features, because they're gunning for whatever gives them that feeling of respecting the person through some kind of dominance, even if it's only superficial.

The red pill community loves demonizing this type of woman.

I personally dated one, and it's nothing like you would expect because they're highly socialized. They know what to say and not say but they're always hiding their true deeper values. They know how to present themselves like a good person, and they're in conflict not liking that they can't fit societals image of a good person. They constantly feel desires to do things That are directly against who they want to be, and who they want to be is a blue/orange socially constructed idea of what a good person is.

The reason they have identity conflict is because they have red values but Society is centered at Orange or blue, and they're fighting who they are (red. values) vs societies standards of what they should be (blue/orange values). 

The red woman who are not in identity conflict and not playing games to hide themselves. are healthy, and are the ones on the talk show podcast saying exactly what they want and it triggers men. "i only date black guys" 

Edited 6 hours ago by integral

[enchanted]

22 minutes ago, integral said:

 They view the world through respect, it's an emotional inner locus, and if they don't hold you in high enough regard they won't let you lead them. They'll only accept a leader they respect and resist anyone who isn't, to the end.

 

I think that this is a big reason most women are younger than their partners. 

[Xonas Pitfall]

Hmm.. 

I feel like most people have a certain threshold or bias regarding who they will or won't let influence them. It's just that some people have more of a "kink" side to it, whether they're men or women who want to be the "tamer," the leader, or the one who "puts people in their place." Likewise, there are people who enjoy being "put in their place."

That's why you'll have some women who find those same "hood" guys to be lazy, ghetto, distasteful, or not respectable, and instead prefer a classy, business-type man. The same applies to women. Some men will only respect or see someone as a respectable wife if she meets their standards for attractiveness, religiosity, intelligence, or other qualities.

I feel like we all have that aspect of the "red" in us. Who do we choose to let lead us? Who do we respect? It's just expressed at completely different levels of consciousness and in very different ways.

Edited 6 hours ago by Xonas Pitfall

[integral]

6 minutes ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

Hmm.. 

I don't know, this seems a bit one-sided or myopic. I feel like most people have a certain threshold or bias regarding who they will or won't let influence them. It's just that some people have more of a "kink" side to it, whether they're men or women who want to be the "tamer," the leader, or the one who "puts people in their place." Likewise, there are people who enjoy being "put in their place."

That's why you'll have some women who find those same "hood" guys to be lazy, ghetto, distasteful, or not respectable, and instead prefer a classy, business-type man. The same applies to women. Some men will only respect or see someone as a respectable wife if she meets their standards for attractiveness, religiosity, intelligence, or other qualities.

I feel like we all have that aspect of the "red" in us. Who do we choose to let lead us? Who do we respect? It's just expressed at completely different levels of consciousness and in very different ways.

I believe respect is mostly values.

To a person who is not thinking in terms of respect, the idea of respect doesn't exist. They're not respecting people or not respecting people. They give everyone equal value as everyone is a unique person.

Respect is a way of thinking that is only there for someone who lives in a bubble of giving and taking respect. 

Quote

if she meets their standards for attractiveness, religiosity, intelligence, or other qualities.

Having standards is separate from respect.

Respecting someone only if they have certain qualities is a game someone is playing.

Imagine judging someone and not respecting them if they don't hold some quality. Well, that is a specific value system being expressed within that person's thinking process and emotional system.

Edited 6 hours ago by integral

[Xonas Pitfall]

Hmm. But wouldn't you say that these "red" women simply have a particular standard? Whether they arrived at it through social conformity or their own values, they have a preference for a very "hood," gang-affiliated-like Black guy. In the same way, another woman might prefer a classy businessman who enjoys wine and golf, while someone else might only respect or be attracted to a man who loves reading literature and comes across as highly educated.

How do you differentiate? Between someone's standards, tastes, values, and who they do or don't respect?

I’d think that if you’re looking for a healthy relationship, ideally both people should fall into a kind of shared “bubble” where they respect each other’s standards, or at least align with each other’s standards.

Edited 5 hours ago by Xonas Pitfall

[integral]

9 minutes ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

Hmm. But wouldn't you say that these "red" women simply have a particular standard? Whether they arrived at it through social conformity or their own values, they have a preference for a very "hood," gang-affiliated-like Black guy. In the same way, another woman might prefer a classy businessman who enjoys wine and golf, while someone else might only respect or be attracted to a man who loves reading literature and comes across as highly educated.

How do you differentiate? Between someone's standards, tastes, values, and who they do or don't respect?

I think we're confusing different concepts, everyone has their standards and what they're attracted to or not.

Most people will sleep with anyone who's hot it doesn't matter what are they respect them or not. A guy will sleep with a girl who works at McDonald's I mean it makes no difference, women will sleep with the gangster with the tattoos even though there's nothing respectful about it because it's just hot. That bad boy masculine energy is hot and they want to have sex.

But I was talking about is red value of respect, well you have to be of a certain status in order to deserve having sex with me or else I can't get turned on. You have to be above me or else I can get turned on. You have to be worthy of leading me. You have to be Alpha male

This is an entire value system that is specific to Red women that is called respect and it guides their attraction system.

But not all red women are like this, it's just one type of way it could show up

Edited 5 hours ago by integral

[Xonas Pitfall]

2 minutes ago, integral said:

But I was talking about is red value of respect, well you have to be of a certain status in order to deserve having sex with me or else I can't get turned on. You have to be above me or else I can get turned on. You have to be worthy of leading me. You have to be Alpha male

Gotcha, I understand now. My question is: how would you differentiate this in the case of, say, a “blue” woman who wouldn’t want to have sex unless the man is a respectable Christian, or someone who values virginity and preserving purity? You have to be a certain level of “nobility” or “godliness” before you can have sex with me.

Or, for example, a “hippie green” woman who wants an emotionally aware, conscientious man and avoids what she sees as “dirty” or “corrupt” red-pill Orange types before having sex.

I’m giving random examples, but you get my point haha.

[integral]

35 minutes ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

Gotcha, I understand now. My question is: how would you differentiate this in the case of, say, a “blue” woman who wouldn’t want to have sex unless the man is a respectable Christian, or someone who values virginity and preserving purity? You have to be a certain level of “nobility” or “godliness” before you can have sex with me.

Or, for example, a “hippie green” woman who wants an emotionally aware, conscientious man and avoids what she sees as “dirty” or “corrupt” red-pill Orange types before having sex.

I’m giving random examples, but you get my point haha.

I think you're right lmao

Quote

• Beige (survival) — Pre-respect. No stable self to do the respecting. What commands deference is whatever keeps you alive in the moment. There's no "who do I let lead me," only "what do I need right now."
• Purple (tribal/magical) — Respects lineage, blood, elders, ancestors, the shaman/chief, ritual and taboo. Authority comes from belonging and tradition-as-magic. You earn standing by being kin and honoring the ways; you lose all of it by violating the tribe's taboos.
• Red (egocentric/power) — Respects raw dominance, strength, fearlessness, the capacity to impose will. This is where the word "respect" literally lives — the street/prison/gang sense. You respect whoever can dominate you or whoever you can't dominate. This is exactly your "you have to be above me / worthy of leading me / alpha" mechanism. Earned by demonstrated power; lost by showing weakness.
• Blue (conformist/order) — Respects rightful authority, rank, the office (not the person), doctrine, duty, righteousness, discipline, sacrifice. Legitimacy is conferred by the order itself. This is Xonas's "respectable Christian" — earned by being righteous and dutiful, lost by sin or dishonor.
• Orange (achievist/rational) — Respects competence, achievement, intelligence, results, earned status, wealth, expertise. Merit by performance. This is the "classy businessman who golfs and reads." Earned by winning and demonstrable capability; lost by failure or incompetence.
• Green (communitarian/pluralist) — Respects authenticity, emotional intelligence, sensitivity, egalitarian relating. Critically, Green is suspicious of hierarchical respect itself and reframes it as mutual dignity owed to everyone. This is the "emotionally aware conscientious man." Earned by being inclusive and self-aware; lost by being domineering or judgmental.
• Yellow (integrative/systemic) — Respects genuine functional capacity in context. Authority is fluid and per-domain — you defer to whoever actually has the relevant competence for this situation, without ego-investment in the hierarchy. Earned by real capacity; granted and withdrawn flexibly.
• Turquoise (holistic) — Respect shades into reverence: for the whole, the field, consciousness, beingness itself. Less "who do I let lead me," more "what does this living system as a whole call for."

The thing with red is that the word respect is used at a whole other level.

I had a friend once that he would walk into a room and he would immediately be analyzing and figuring out who respects him or not.

And if someone looked at him across the room he would know by Vibe and figure out whether he's being respected or disrespected.

So there's this domain of respect that just doesn't happen with the other stages at the same level.

---

All the other stages are not doing a calculation whether they respect you or not in real time. They might figure that stuff after depending on what your values are. But in general the way we socialize with each other we hide our true selves because we're all socialized and calibrated.

But at stage red there they only care immediately about whether they respect you or not and that they're constantly trying to place you in some category based on superficial things like the way you carry yourself and your posture and the confidence in your tone of voice.

A blue woman and a green woman might respect certain things but they don't see it immediately. So they're going to sleep with you anyway, respect isn't tied to their attraction system in the same way.

Edited 5 hours ago by integral

[Jannes]

1 hour ago, integral said:

So they end up only dating black guys, because a black guy's appearance is as naturally more on the bad-boy spectrum of ruggedness and masculinity, deeper voice, relax don't give a shit, just by being black, and they'll only go for a certain height and build, men with these superficial masculine features, because they're gunning for whatever gives them that feeling of respecting the person through some kind of dominance, even if it's only superficial.

Thats kinda racist. There are plenty of white guys with these kind of traits and plenty of soft black guys. There is a cultural difference but I dont think its big enough to make such generalizations. 

...

I dont know, every women is attracted to strength and they will shit test men for it. If they are more developed less so probably. 

Yeah I see what you are saying. I just think most men experienced being weak and loosing the attraction of a girl because of it at some point in their lifes. Its easy to become angry at women because of it.

[integral]

5 minutes ago, Jannes said:

Thats kinda racist. There are plenty of white guys with these kind of traits and plenty of soft black guys. There is a cultural difference but I dont think its big enough to make such generalizations. 

I was talking about a specific type of woman and literally repeating what they said. I can't find the video, I just watched a video yesterday of a woman saying "I only date black guys" and "a man has to be able to put me in my place".

I'm not saying all black people are a certain way

Edited 4 hours ago by integral

[aurum]

The women you’re describing may be more extreme or overt about it. But every woman wants to respect their man. That’s not some unique phenomenon.

[Xonas Pitfall]

48 minutes ago, aurum said:

The women you’re describing may be more extreme or overt about it. But every woman wants to respect their man. That’s not some unique phenomenon.

Yes, I think this is a much more grounded way of looking at it.

2 hours ago, integral said:

The thing with red is that the word respect is used at a whole other level.

It might just be semantics, I'm not sure. But the way I see it, someone at stage "red" simply has their own "stereotype", "aesthetic", or "idealized image" of what a respectable figure looks like. That image is more likely to be mobster-like, aggressive, dominant, or intimidating, etc.

The same applies to the stages above red. The difference is that, as you move up the stages, you get more complexity and nuance in what that "respectable" figure can be. That said, even stages slightly above red can still have a very black-and-white flavor, like in the examples I gave earlier: "You have to be a certain level of nobility or godliness before you can have sex with me. Stage Blue."

As you move higher through the stages, you also become more aware of your own biases. You're more likely to question what you're actually valuing and responding to, rather than reflexively respecting whatever your culture or ideology tells you is worthy of respect.

Red tends to be a more conformist level in this sense, so its ideals are often more stereotypical and easier to point to as examples.

Quote

I had a friend once that he would walk into a room and he would immediately be analyzing and figuring out who respects him or not.

However, this I do agree! Maybe a more accurate term would be something like "dominance hierarchy" or "power hierarchy." (the classic "masculine patriarchal intimidation scale") Who's the strongest? Who's the toughest? Who has the most power? Who can dominate everyone else?

I say that because I think most people care about respect and being respected. Everyone respects some people more than others. But this particular style of thinking, where social interactions are framed as a "dog-eat-dog world" or a constant "cock-fest" competition, seems much more characteristic of stage Red environments. Those kinds of egos also tend to be more prone to stage Red and, to some extent, stage Orange ways of interpreting status and relationships.

Edited 2 hours ago by Xonas Pitfall