Many guys approach The Red Pill with a question that goes something like, “My girlfriend (or some girl I’m dating, fucking, or just interested in) said X after I did Y, so I responded Z. How did I do? What did she mean by this? What is she trying to do?”

It’s normal, as a human being with functioning ears, to listen to things we hear and react to them. This is how we avoid potential dangers. This is also how we obtain new knowledge, such as by receiving information and thoughts from other humans. Listening to what people say is half of the process, while talking is the other half, right?Wrong.

It is estimated that about 7% of communication is verbal. The remaining 93% is some combination of body language, tonality, and all kinds of other details and signals, right down to what socks you wore when you showed up to meet somebody. The fact that you didn’t make a point of wearing your newest pair of socks may well bother your girlfriend far more than anything you say to her the entire night, but she won’t say a word to you about it. Instead, she will answer everything you say with short, one to three word statements, make no effort to initiate any conversational topics of her own, shrink away every time you try to touch her, and pretend to be on her period to get out of sex. You unintentionally communicated to her that you don’t care about her or your relationship because you couldn’t be bothered to wear the right socks. So she intentionally tried to communicate to you that she’s not going to make any effort regarding you or the relationship. Unmistakably clear communication, right?

So naturally, during the night, you might ask her, “Is something bothering you?”, responsive to which she will answer that everything is fine. As a normal human being with functioning ears, you may hear her respond that everything is fine, assume that everything is fine, and try to have normal conversation with her for the rest of the night. But she tried to communicate to you that everything is not fine by answering you with a curt statement using a bland tone of voice. You ignored what she tried to communicate and just kept trying to act like everything was fine, further confirming that you don’t care about her, her feelings, or the relationship. Combined with the sock incident, this was completely unacceptable, so she spent the rest of dinner texting one of her male co-workers to set up a lunch date tomorrow.

When somebody asks the question “Some girl said X. What did she mean?” he is making a very critical error: He is listening to shit women say.

Never listen to shit women say. When a guy asks about something some girl said to him, the first question you ask this guy should be: “Is she fucking you?”

That’s it. That’s all you need to know. If she’s fucking him, she’s into him. If she’s not fucking him, she is not into him. The sounds she happens to make with her mouth don’t matter at all, only her actions. Is she fucking him, or not?

However, most guys fall into a gray area. She fucks him sometimes, but doesn’t fuck him other times. And most of what she says and does seems to be attempts to try to get him to say or do certain things, responsive to which she acts happy and sometimes fucks him, but sometimes doesn’t, seemingly at random. One might think that whether or not she fucks him is completely disconnected from what she says with her words. To an extent, this is true, but most of the time, her words are a shit test.

A shit test is essentially a power struggle. A test of who is dominant in the relationship. You want to have sex. She knows you want to have sex. She wants to have sex, too. But instead of having sex, she says something completely unrelated to sex. The normal instinct of a man having functioning ears would be to respond to what she said, and if what she said is a problem, to try to resolve it. But after he complies with whatever it was she said, she proceeds to not have sex with him! If he then attempts to initiate sex, she acts aghast! “What? After I had to tell you to do X instead of you doing it yourself, now you want sex? You didn’t care enough to have done X before I said something. I’m not feeling very close to you right now!” Or sometimes, she might say, “What? You only did X for me because you thought it would lead to sex? That’s manipulative! I am hurt. You must now make this up to me for many weeks before we have sex again.”

Never listen to shit women say. What she’s saying to you is secondary. The only question you need to concern yourself with is whether or not she’s fucking you.

If a woman is into you, she will fuck you without reservation and without imposing conditions on you. You can be the biggest asshole on the planet who’s never done shit for her, and she will beg you to fuck her. Sex with you is its own reward for her. She feels like it’s something she works to earn, rather than something you work to earn from her.

If a woman is not into you, she will make you jump through hoops with the vague notion that this may lead to sex sometime in the future, maybe, if she feels like it and you maintain your good behavior. Sex with you is a grudging chore she tries to avoid. She feels like it’s something you have to earn, and it’s annoying to have to put out every so often to keep you from whining too much.

The specific words a woman says aren’t that important. Wracking your brain trying to figure out what she meant or how you should respond is a waste of time. She’s either fucking you or she’s not.

Every time you say something to a woman, it should not be a direct response to her previous statement. It should be a stepping stone toward your objective: Sex. You should have a plan to lead her toward sex. Maybe you’re going to go to this first location and do a first activity, then leave at a certain time to go to a second location if necessary, then to your apartment, where you will do another activity and end up having sex. Everything you say to her should be taking charge of the interaction and leading it according to your plan.

She will try to throw monkey wrenches into your plan. She will try to get you to stop leading the interaction and start responding, line by line, to things she says. She will try to become the leader of the interaction, while you react to her words. Then, at the end of the interaction, she will feel like everything was disorganized. There was no plan. The two of you just spun your wheels, and she didn’t have a good time.

Don’t waste any more time listening to a woman’s words. That’s not how they communicate. Look only to her actions. She is either fucking you, or fucking with you.

There was recently a man lamenting on the Married Red Pill subreddit about his wife’s sexual history. He was a virgin when he met her, and to date, she is the only person he has ever had sex with. When asked, she told him she had 2-4 previous partners. I’m not quite sure why she answered him with a numerical range, especially when there are only three integers included in that range, all three of which are a small enough quantity to clearly remember the accurate number, and none of which are socially embarrassing. It’s almost like she didn’t want to tell him, or was lying. But whatever.

Like most lost boys, this man didn’t understand his problem. He said he felt like he was missing out, which is true. He did feel that way. But he thought that the reason he was missing out was because he had only had sex with his wife, while she had some previous sex before him. This was eating at him terribly, and he was wondering if it would be best if he divorced his otherwise satisfactory wife to have sex with other women.

Obviously, the “right” answer is to forget her sexual history. He’s married, has two kids, and at least by his report, his wife is a good wife and mother. I don’t think he’d be able to take it if he dumped her and she started fucking other guys, introducing his kids to them, and playing family with someone else. Plus, her sexual history isn’t the issue he should have been looking at. The right questions are whether or not she’s fucking him on the regular, whether or not she treats him with respect and deference, and whether or not she stands by his side and supports him as he leads their family forward. The fact that she fucked other guys previously, while he was too much of a loser to get any, doesn’t really matter if she’s a decent mother to his kids and treats him well today, both personally and sexually.

But this guy’s issue was interesting, because he thought his problem was lack of sexual experience, or even just an aversion to his wife’s potentially slutty past (assuming her professed sexual history was under-reported, which seems very possible given that she answered “2-4” instead of replying with an integer). Neither of these were his issue at all, however. This man’s problem was much simpler: He had oneitis for his wife.

He was not obsessing over all the women he didn’t fuck when he was younger. He was obsessing over all of the men his wife did fuck. He had given her all of himself, while he was only getting what was left of her after she had given herself to others.

He didn’t feel like he was missing out on other women. He felt like he was missing out on his wife.

Instead of getting everything she used to be, he got what was left, after her past. And he was consumed with the idea – the fantasy – of his wife, the virgin, and how he should have gotten all of her, not just the remainder.

While it’s not discussed heavily, this is really part of the reason why men are so repulsed by sluts. When we invest in a woman, we want all of her. Not just the parts she has left after giving herself to numerous previous men. We don’t want to pay full price and give all of ourselves for half of a woman.

The thing is, this is classic oneitis. In the case of our example man, he had placed the idea of his wife, the virgin, on a pedestal. He failed to realize that even before she met him, and even before she’d ever had sex, his wife, the virgin, was still just a woman. She wasn’t any more special, unique, or perfect than she is today. She was just another woman. Easily replaceable, and just as likely as any other woman to lie, cheat, leave, make shitty decisions, and so on, responsive to the right stimulus (the right stimulus most often including loser behavior from her man).

Ironically, in an indirect way, fucking lots of women before marrying his wife would have helped this guy out, but not for the reasons he thought. It wasn’t fucking other women he had missed out on, nor was it evening the score before meeting his wife. What he was missing were the lessons best learned through experience: that sex isn’t anything special, and women aren’t anything special. If this guy had fucked his way through a few dozen women, the fact that one particular woman he was currently fucking had a sexual history wouldn’t bother him. Because he’d understand that sex isn’t special, and this woman isn’t special. He wouldn’t idealize what this woman used to be, pre-sex, because he would understand that even then, she was just a woman like any other.

Worrying about whether one particular woman is or isn’t a slut is, at its core, a form of oneitis. Unless you’re a child and just starting to notice girls or travel in some extremely religious circles, all women you meet have some kind of sexual history, and on a broader scale, all women have some kind of life history. When we obsess over a woman’s past, sexual or otherwise, what we’re really experiencing is a fear of loss, a fear of missing out, or possibly a fear of buyer’s remorse. We worry that if we invest in a particular woman, we won’t be getting all of her, just what’s left after her past.

These aren’t socially popular thoughts, however, so the blue pill world has spun a narrative to twist things a little bit, in the form of modern sex-positive ideology. In the blue pill word, sexual experience is natural, healthy, expected, and even encouraged. It’s practically regarded as an essential rite of passage for every girl to have a wild, slutty, casual sex phase, to “experience life”, “figure out what she likes”, and “get it out of her system while she’s young”, and people today laud this as a good thing. Since every human is the sum of his or her experiences, it stands to reason in the blue pill universe that a sexually experienced woman will know a lot of great sexual techniques, will be confident in bed, know what she likes and doesn’t like, and so on. All of that slutty casual sex is regarded as a very positive experience that has enriched a woman and turned her into the great, sexually liberated person she is today.

The less extreme corners of the blue pill world are less sex-positive, but still fairly sex-neutral. Since the vagina isn’t physically used up by having sex, the sex-neutral thing to do is to ignore a woman’s sexual history. She still has a working vagina, nothing is used up, and therefore sex has not negatively affected her as a sex or relationship prospect, so we’re not supposed to ask or care about her sexual history.

In contrast, the Red Pill’s fixation on sexual promiscuity is a fairly sex-negative ideology. The notion that sex diminishes a woman, and if you invest in a slut, you’re investing in a used-up, less valuable fraction of a woman that gave parts of herself to others before you, is a pretty classic sex-negative mindset. Not that there’s anything inherently wrong with this mindset over the other two. Because in many cases, previous sex is very negative.

The fact is, we’re all the sum of our life experiences, but not all life experience is positive. If one of your life’s experiences involved having all of your limbs blown off, that experience has diminished you, not enriched you. If you’re a heavily-traumatized rape victim and plagued by that baggage despite years of therapy, that experience has not improved your life. It’s crippled it. Not all life experience is positive and enriching. And the same applies to sex.

The next time the blue pill universe tries to tell you that a sexually experienced woman is better than a less promiscuous woman, ask whether a rape victim is better off than a virgin. Nobody seriously believes that a bar slut who goes home with a different dick every weekend, desperately searching for validation from the touch of men, is actually a strong, empowered, liberated woman. Nobody thinks that’s healthy behavior. Not all sex is positive.

But not all sex is negative either. A wife who has a very healthy sexual relationship with her husband is having exactly that: healthy sex. If her husband gets run over by a truck and she starts to date again, do the years upon years of sex she had with her husband diminish her or detract from her life? Of course not. If anything, her ability to build that kind of sexual relationship with her past husband reflects well on her. Likewise, if a girl you’re currently dating fucked her previous boyfriend, but they were together for three years and had a very healthy relationship, does the fact that she has the ability to form a sexual relationship with a long-term boyfriend really ruin her? Of course not. I’d be more wary of a girl who was with her boyfriend for several years and didn’t fuck him.

Now, am I saying that sexual history isn’t important when judging a woman? Fuck no. I’m actually saying the opposite. Sexual history is vitally important. Detailed sexual history. Not just a woman’s body count, but who she fucked, how, under what circumstances.

But society dictates that nobody is to share this information, and nobody is to ask about it, and if you ever ask, that immediately brands you as “insecure” and an unworthy prospect, which makes it okay to lie to you. The downfall of modern women isn’t that they’re slutty. Or I guess, it isn’t just that they’re slutty. It’s that they lie. You will never, ever, obtain an accurate recounting of a woman’s sexual past, because women know what sells, and they will lie through their teeth to get you to buy it.

In short, there’s no point in obsessing over whether a girl you’re currently eyeing is a slut. You’ll never know for sure, because she’ll lie and take great pains hide it. Additionally, obsessing over the parts of her she already gave away, as though this woman, before she became a slut, was somehow special is a form of oneitis. It’s putting the idea of what this woman might have been previously on a very, very undeserved pedestal. The woman she used to be became a slut when exposed to the right circumstances, so it’s not like the woman she used to be was that great.

So for every woman you meet, you need to do two things. First, assume she’s a slut. Anything she says or does that seems non-slutty is probably an act, because women hide their slut-pasts. If she’s actually a non-slut, great, but the burden is on her to prove she’s an exceptional woman, not on you to assume she’s great until she slips up and gets caught in a lie. Second, pretend to be sex-positive. Act like you think sluts are cool and fun and funny and smart and that their stories, especially the sexual ones, are oh so interesting. Be open and non-judgmental on the outside, while secretly laughing at them on the inside. Make them feel comfortable as they fuck you while you seemingly don’t judge them for their past and silently place them in the fuck-only box.

The burden is on a woman to prove to you she’s more than just a fuck object. Not on you to seek out her favorable traits or to assume she’s awesome until she gets caught.