File: 1577459115721.jpeg (75.12 KB, 564x846, 9DAA2E5C-1DBF-4EDD-BC3B-096E7F…)
No. 288
Female Dating Strategy is a subreddit which was created in February 2019 as part of the larger arising of pp’d subreddits (such as r/vindicta, r/pinkpilledfeminism, r/trufemcels, etc.)
Female Dating Strategy is a female-only subreddit that was created in the interest of helping women to achieve their goals in dating, whether that be LTR, marriage or just FWB. It is centred entirely around maximising female benefit and minimising costs/risk. More saliently, due to its policy of being aggressively pro-female, FDS promotes a very unforgiving and cutthroat approach to interactions with males. In many respects, it is a response to the presence of the ‘manosphere’ and in particular TRP.
Important links:
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/ideology Ideology of FDS
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/dugj5t/fds_guide_nonmainstream_opinions_and_strategies/ Non-mainstream opinions and strategies held by the sub
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/deoi18/psa_femaledatingstrategy_doesnt_believe_in_asking/ PSA on asking men out
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/d22vzv/given_that_the_risks_of_sex_are_way_higher_and/ why sex shouldn’t be had easily
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/dblfg2/mythology_break_down_1_men_telling_you_youll_max/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf debunking the wall
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/dfeq1s/various_hacks_will_encourage_you_to_not_get/ on why career > dating for most women
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/e7m5m4/the_most_important_fds_message_you_are_not/ women are not responsible for male depravity
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/recommended_reading other links
No. 294
>It has been proven time and time again that asking men for their number, asking them out on dates, initiating texts with them, traveling to meet them instead of them coming to you, and splitting the bill – they don't work if you want a relationship with a man who's crazy about you, provides, and is proud to have you as their girlfriend.
Amen to this. Don't chase men, ladies. If there's one thing in current dating that really peeves me, it's this. Some women think they're being empowering by overperforming when all they're doing is attracting low-effort males who will only see these actions not as a signal of ambition, but of useful idiocy. They get the boost of ego without having to risk rejection because the woman is doing all the legwork. Don't give them this power over yourselves, you're making it too easy for them to use you.
No. 314
>>303This, the strategy is specifically for pinkpilled straight women, since most dating advice given to women is male-centred. Pick-mes would simply derail it.
>>308Its ideology is radfem-adjacent and many of the mods/posters come from r/GC
No. 322
File: 1577471547231.jpeg (317.89 KB, 827x1200, 15AB1DF6-4538-4972-8DB5-DBA9F7…)
>>317I’ve been browsing /FDS/ semi-regularly since around November. There are definitely some cringy aspects of the subreddit, namely certain posters and the ‘yas Queen’ twitter bullshit. Most of the ire generated by FDS I think proceeds from the fact that males have a vested interest in keeping women’s standards and self esteem low, so that they can remain competitive. The male sexual imperative involves copulating with as many fertile high value women, for the absolute lowest investment as possible. Since FDS advocates in gatekeeping access to sex until a certain degree of male investment is procured (a measure of self preservation since it’s meant to ensure you don’t get p ‘n’ d), the FDS philosophy is antagonistic towards the fulfilment of that sexual imperative. The very same people (particularly males) who whine about FDS will handwave the existence of TRP, despite it essentially being the male equivalent and just as Machiavellian.
No. 353
>>322Agreed. Men are so desperate to convince women that the lowest of standards are unreasonable.
One time I told a group of male acquaintances that I wanted a partner that took care of himself, had common interests with me, showed me respect and didn't expect me to act like his mother and they acted like I had shot all of their pets in front of them.
FDS is just taking men at their word when they say who they are.
No. 381
>>322>males have a vested interest in keeping women’s standards and self esteem lowTruth. And patriarchy is an unnatural affair that enables subpar men to spread their genes. The world would look very different if women were not oppressed and discriminated against, had good self-confidence, as we would only pick the most suitable and good men. We can still remember our value and only choose the men that lives up to our standards.
Still wondering how much luck FDS anons have with making men pay for everything though. That seems to be one of the most important rules of that sub.
No. 391
>>388Thats so funny to me because usually the male protagonists in romance novels are straight up rapists or apathetic assholes. The 50 shades boom produces many novels with
abusive males leads and almost all classics from like the 70s are also
problematic as fuck. Scrotes are sperging about shit they have no clue about as always.
No. 395
>>381>The world would look very different if women were not oppressed and discriminated against, had good self-confidence, as we would only pick the most suitable and good menDefinitely. The other part of their strategy is to ensure women are DESPERATE to be married and have children before a certain age. Men use scare and shame tactics incessantly against women who dare not to do either or wait until they are older, because a woman who refuses to play the game is a direct threat to male interests. The combination of low standards/self esteem + a time limit for when we are 'good enough' to find a partner ensures scrots get to marry women who are much younger and better looking than them. Then they treat their wives like garbage with no consequences, because men also revile single mothers to give them incentive to stay with shitty men no matter what.
Women have to become comfortable with the idea of being alone if we're ever going to change male behaviour for the better and keep ourselves safe.
No. 458
>>316If it's inappropriate and he's trying to hide it, don't chase him, anon. Have dignity and don't shit where you eat.
>>353You all gotta stop talking to online weirdos (I mean we are too, but women aren't degenerates like moids) and talk to some normies with core values who understand that women also want to be attracted to their partner. If you have to date men, find one who plays sports and at least has a nice body and understands teamwork.
No. 463
>1.Be a high value woman.
Everywhere we go, we are treated like fucking objects. Ffs, stop it. Women don't have a value, we aren't related to the Stock Market in any way. We are human, thanks.
>She has her own career, hobbies, and a great social life that fulfills her emotional needs.
"you have to be the perfect, flawless bussiness woman to start dating correctly"
Yikes. I understand some of the points they are trying to come across but the phrasing is wonky. I know it's trying to tell women to develop themselves without focusing on males, but at the same time it can be read as "be perfect or no quality man will look at you twice".
I'm going to tell you a secret, anons. Don't date. At all. Why suffer through all of this when you can just forget about dating and, as the first rule says, focus on your life?? Men are all the same, if you don't like their general behaviour (male socialization) you won't like any of them. There's no special-snowflake-prince-charming waiting for you out there, and sure as hell there's no (rad)feminist man who will understand you. The sooner you understand this, the better.
No. 473
>>381Never been on FDS but I've never had trouble with it.
Works best if you act willing to pay/split and then they'll insist on paying for you.
At least that's how it's always been with me when I dated.
No. 528
File: 1577801132053.png (803.29 KB, 958x752, 1577505358936.png)
I have a problem with FDS because they all seem to chase the same type of man. For me, a high value man is emotionally stable, caring, patient, not hypersexual (ideally a virgin), good looking, youthful somewhat feminie, loyal, etc. I wouldn't want a guy who pays for anything and is a provider or an "alpha" male. I'm curious if any anons feel the same?
No. 558
File: 1577838765672.png (85.78 KB, 760x304, Screenshot_20200101-013149.png)
>>556I read it some time ago, but I remember being kind of uncomfortable with how the relationship between the 30 year old woman and the (14-15?) boy was developed. Like, the woman couldn't restrain herself from being attracted to him, so she ghosted the kid for years. Eh… Reminds me of some lolicon mangas where the teacher is OBVIOUSLY ATTRACTED to the 6 year old kid but he tries not to give in to his fantasies (yuck)…
Sorry for derailing.
No. 579
>>528This, a high value man to me is empathetic and virginal as well.
But I also think the philosophy behind FDS is that no naturally kind males exist so seeking these sorts out is pointless, and that only money and looks can be the benefits of engaging with men.
No. 781
>>721Keeping track of the value of gifts sounds like a controlling fucking nightmare. Gifts are gifts. There's no obligation put on someone for accepting them and there isn't a scale you have to balance.
This seems like a pretty big red flag.
No. 877
>>835Actually I don't see too much of that on there. Its mainly taking care of yourself and building yourself up. Not looking for a man who will provide for you all the way.
Looking for man to pay for your date is not the same thing.
No. 883
>>835The problem with gold digging is not having your own money and therefore relying on a man for it. Another problem is lowering your standards in other areas in order to prioritize money. It's not the same as expecting a man to invest financially in you to prove he's actually interested and not just trying to get the easiest fuck possible out of your interactions, and I've never seen FDS encourage women to date or 'finesse' old men, the opposite is more common.
I can understand finding it uncomfortable. I've always liked to pay for myself for a few reasons… so he doesn't think I owe him anything, so he knows I'm not poor, and yes, in a pickme-esque fashion I didn't want to be seen as a gold digger. I just genuinely don't need a guy's money so it felt like selling myself short if I acted like I did, as if we aren't equal even in finances. But men have pretty much forced our hand, if we could assume they weren't trying to get low effort sex out of every date, if we could be equal without them taking advantage at every opportunity, we wouldn't need to vet them like this.
No. 899
>>850Exactly!!!
>>860On reddit they're all obsess with providing and I've seen typical Sugar bb tweets like "dating young men is like an unpaid internship"….It's also very common in women's forums.
A rich guy taking you to fancy restaurants and buying you a bag, isn't doing more effort than the poor guy buying you McDonalds. Providing isn't a sign of respect or commitment. Young women are easily impress with money and they should not.
It's just about common sense. Of course, someone really interested in you will do efforts. Of course you should care about yourself first, especially when you're young.
Idk too much "YAASSS QUEEN" shit in FDS and when you see the posters history, you see women that have dated drug dealers or else. I mean…
No. 920
>>916I didn’t say that. What I said is that for a rich man, buying you a bag isn’t much and doesn’t mean shit. Some of these men have bitches in every city and a whole hidden family.
I don’t say that dating a fucking bum is better. The two partners should have the same vision of life and equivalent status.
No. 924
>>899I agree with your point. How can you be 18yo and expect men your age to provide for you?
They're telling those women to seek mid to late 20s men at best if they wanna be provided for.
No. 937
>>901>>911Why would you post this here? no sense of coding jfc
>>902No there isn't, It's just common with girls in the sugaring community
No. 2238
>>916This I grew up with my mom doing th cleaning and working two physical jobs whilst her lard ass potato husband called me fat.
LVM are the worst
No. 2416
>>380>literally teenage girls >juvenileWell, yes, but no need to be bitter about it. I skimmed through this thread and that board, and none of this talk has anything to do with my life as a middle aged woman. But us older people have no need for such things, we know what we want and how to get it (spoiler alert: It's different for everybody). It's natural that the younger someone is, the more they'll be drawn towards stuff like this as part of their learning experience and experimentation.
That's not "cringy", just common sense.
No. 2738
>>2729So what if one women has higher standards than average? You're just assuming that she doesn't have anything to offer herself. Hot girls can afford to have high standards.
Why are men allowed to go for women way above their league but said woman is shallow if she won't settle for his broke, ugly fatass?
If incels want to use that to fuel their defeatist mindset that's their fucking problem. They're going to cry either way.
No. 2741
>>2722I knew I had seen this phrase on /r9k/ before
https://desuarchive.org/r9k/search/text/666%20figures/I cant find an instance of it before the first posts date on there so they probably literally invented it as a misogynist meme
No. 2768
>>2738I’m sick of anons coming here like ~we’re just proving the incels right, we’re just as bad as them uwu~
Women who are highly attractive and accomplished really
should have high standards. It’s not unusual for a man to have standards that surpass their own assets, the incels are very guilty of this.
I personally use FTS as a way to get a partner who is equal to myself. Insecurity has lead me to date guys who are far lesser than myself, thinking they’d appreciate and be nice to me, but I ended up being abused, and I left the relationship as a diminished person. I want a man who is good in bed, not ugly, not badly groomed and a good conversationalist, ambitious and creative. All of those are assets I know I have to offer myself. I deserve to expect a man that matches me in quality and status, and I’d rather be alone than settle for less. If men and handmaidens want to cry about it then tough shit.
No. 2780
File: 1579545758363.jpg (64.99 KB, 700x582, 1579511248833.jpg)
>>2722I was thinking about creating thread on /snow/ based on incels forum (much like the fun r/incels threads we had few years ago), so I've been "researching" and the standards they all have simply floored me. Out of around 200 active users, there are maybe a couple willing to "settle" for their "looksmatch" (of course, only if she is a young white virgin). There are literally only two users who'd be willing to date a non-virgin woman around their age who is just as (un)attractive as them. Two out of two hundred have somewhat realistic/reasonable standards. And yet, I don't see anyone making fun of that. Those men are the lowest value males you can think of - NEETs, horrible hygienie, extremely unattractive, they often have BPD/NPD, they are almost all pedos (as in, literal pedos - they want to date 11yos), violent, lazy, etc. And all of them have sky high standards.
Just think about those men every time you get angry at attractive women who want o date attractive men.
No. 2790
>>2768I have high standards but they don't come in the form of a set height, salary and dick size. To me she sounds like scrotes saying they will only be in a relationship with a woman who has D cups minimum. It's not having a preference for taller men, bigger dicks and large wallets that's weird, it's autistically fixing a minimum size and making it such a priority.
A man, no matter how attractive, smart and rich he is would immediately looks pathetic to me if he had a minimal bra size as a primary criteria when looking for a relationship.
No. 2792
>>2790I mean I agree to a certain extent, it just doesn’t bother me. I don’t have a set menu for what’s attractive, like being 6 ft with a 6 inch would make a man seem more attractive im not gonna lie, but I’d be far more attracted to a guy 5’8 with a smaller dick if I got along well with him, found him interesting and funny and he pleased me in bed, similar interests and values etc.
I don’t want a prize, the way some of these people do, I want a companion. I say 5’8 cos I’m fairly tall for a woman, I’m just barely shorter than that.
No. 2880
File: 1579666147106.jpg (111.51 KB, 506x640, mfw.jpg)
Well let me tell you ladies something: Ever since applying the FDS lens to dating, it's been very eye-opening. I'm in so much shock about how much disrespect I used to tolerate and was gaslit into believing was normal.
These men literally have nothing else to offer but the audacity!
Right now I'm relying on online dating (OLD) to meet new men. Can't say I had better luck meeting men through friends as they turned out to be monsters too. But I digress.
Anyway when I finally match with someone who seems compatible, they wind up being such low effort fucks. Because clearly they're spinning so many other women behind our backs. They want to get the most sex for the least effort and maximum convenience. So no offers to have a first date over dinner or something pricey to impress (date cheap, if not for free), attempt to manipulate the woman to take on the emotional load (make her chase, ask questions, and plan the dates), and to set the meetup location at their convenience (the woman is forced to be more invested by spending time and money to meet).
Matched with this dude who wasn't my type looks-wise but appeared to be put together due to his clean and stylish living conditions and hobbies. He reached out but I put him on the backburner for a few days. When I returned the message he wanted to meet up. I asked him what he was proposing. "Drinks," I was thinking sure–cheap. I hate having first dates in loud and crowded places.
I went along with it just to see where it went. Found myself asking the majority of the questions to drag his own date out of him. Pathetic right? If men ask women out they should already have an offer wtf.
When? And where? Saturday, okay. Time? "6pm." I laughed, I told him that's when people have dinner not drinks (he'd rather go cheap than spend for dinner). Instead of offering dinner, he wanted to push back the time. "8pm." Lol, sure dude. Okay, where for drinks? "[The nearest bar to where I live]." He didn't even bother to check where I was driving from to meet him at a venue that's literally 10 minutes from his place. And he didn't care, because his next statement? "Yeah we can get drinks and see where it goes from there. You can come back to my place and watch Netflix."
So basically this dude is expecting sex for less than the cost of a dinner date, with the added perk that I'd get gussied up and drive myself to him just for his dick.
I replied "Very convenient," then he responded "…okay?" Then he must have went back to my profile before I blocked him, because then he followed up with a "Oh you live in X?" Lmao, I guess he thought I'd throw myself at him.
These men are fucking creeps. What I hate most of all is that not even a month ago I would have agreed to this shitfest. Me expending all the effort just for an awkward and subpar fuck at the end of my night who I'd never speak to again.
No. 2881
>>2722Honestly unless your dating pool is mostly Hispanic guys for whatever reason, it's really not unreasonable to expect a guy to be above 5'10"
I hate that manlets make it out to be this huge deal.
Tbh the most
abusive men Ive known have been manlets. They're insecure as fuck.
I don't think the rest of the 666 rule matters much though, depending on your age. If you're in your early/mid twenties it's more important to know a mans work ethic and his career plans than what his current salary is.
No. 3088
For anyone into FDS, I highly recommend The Rules Revisited blog. It's not very well-known but it's one of the greatest female dating blogs I've ever read. Better than the actual "Rules" book.
I recommend reading the Important Posts in the sidebar first; the other posts are just building on those ones.
>>2880Good for you anon. As soon as a guy gives me a lame response (short, no question to follow up) I unmatch them. If he was really interested, he would at least put in some effort
No. 3132
>>3062Desperate women allowed this to happen
When I was still dating (a year ago) most of it involved
>Only being able to see them if you drove>Dates involved you paying for shit or just having sex and leaving, after a few dates all you would be to him is to come over at 12 pm, give him a blowjob and have shitty sex and leave>No affection, no compliments, no cuddling, no kissing and if there was it was gross/an excuse for him to judge your bodyThat's it. That's literally it. I was so used to being abused by men my boyfriend was getting a culture shock, I would cry anytime he cuddled me because I simply never got that before and he seemed so sad because I just assumed he wanted to have sex with me and had me leave. I wouldn't allow him to take off my clothes because most of the time when a man took my clothes off all I got was insulted, I was so use to being cold it hurt my current bf when we first started dating because I have a really fucked up idea of what relationships are.
No. 3151
>>3148Men get handed everything in dating nowadays
Unless you're willing to be a mommy sex slave to every man that asks you're fucked
No. 3244
>>3234>If men get desperate maybe they'll start to make effort with women.But how do we get rid of pickmes who allow this to happen? Men will get what they can get while putting in the lowest amount of effort possible, as long as if there is okay looking women willing to give themselves to low effort and bottom tier men, then men won't ever improve and the only people to reproduce is desperate pickmes who are going to be horrible influences on their daughters and mentally ill and selfish men who are going to be horrible influences on their sons
I'm honestly scared to see where the world will go, men will continue to deteriorate into greasy blobs who do nothing but cheat, fart, play video games and watch porn all day, women will be the ones who have to work hard on their careers to make money to support men, work out to keep their figure in check, all while doing the cleaning, cooking, child bearing, and so on. Men don't deserve women, mass suicide seems like a liable option at this point
No. 3261
>>3244Look for the guy who doesn't want a pick-me*
*not a femcel, take my words with a grain of salt
No. 3276
>>3262What's that even supposed to mean?
>>3261That would be lovely if they existed. What men want and what men say they want are two different things, men can talk shit all day about how desperate women who live for male attention are pathetic and unattractive but still fall for whatever pickme manipulates them. Men are practically monkey brained
No. 3291
File: 1580127386960.jpg (45.79 KB, 339x499, 51HEsYbtvvL._SX337_BO1,204,203…)
>>3286>non-fiction If his favourite book is a fitness related book, then it's likely he has some self loathing issues to some degree, If a guy has a standard genetic exercise advice book then you should be okay but if his favourite book is Sun and Steel, RUN away and never look back. If he has art related books then make sure its works related to art fundamentals and or the old masters and not weeb shit, I don't know much about guys who are into gardening and zoology though
No. 3319
>>3292Not necessarily bad that he may be boring. Books on plants chickens and beekeeping sound nice. Maybe gardening and cooking too. Idk maybe it's just my vision to be more self sufficient with home keeping and food into the future and if some guy likes that too, it's a win
>>3309Oh God aristotle being anti woman isn't talked about enough. He considered women being treated well, like fellow human beings, as barbaric. Be cautious with men who praise him
No. 3359
>>3322Ngl that sounds appealing to me. It's basic, simple and cute
>>3340not that anon, but I bet they'll be denial. And use the sex scenes in game of thrones as evidence that women were 100% shaven everywhere. Ive witnessed too many guys used GoT as a history lesson
No. 3667
>>3321Most men obsessed with WWII or history won't be able to handle life back then
Calling women gold diggers for paying for dinner, back then they would have to support her financially if they even want to think about a wife
Calling women fat, ugly, out of shape, etc
Most women back then didn't look like porn stars, even Marilyn Monroe would be relentlessly mocked by men nowadays
Women not shaving but most women had bushes and hairy armpits
"Wife bad" jokes were mocked, you HAD to learn to be happy with your wife
No. 3689
>>3673I'm always suspicious at big posts with no history because it's a throwaway and no comments from the poster.
But really
>For about 3 years I slept on the floor instead so I wouldn't be bothered.Paid for everything and yet sleeps like a dog. Well no, worse than. Dogs sleep on comfy beds. She's on the damn floor. And shes hesitant on leaving because he doesn't know how to care for himself… Christ.