Disclaimer: This began as a reply to u/loneliness-inc's post here. I encourage you to read that as well.

Traditional women vs Feral women:

As Dalrock noted in his post, there is only one main difference between a woman who was brought up traditionally and any other women. Unlike feral women, a traditional woman who grew up under the supervision of her father and in a patriarchal society gets disciplined enough through incentives to look past her base biological impulses. She will be incentivized to behave better than her true nature. Can she still become a slut? Sure. Just give her enough opportunities and incentives and she will revert back to her natural feral self.

It is a common trope in trp that women are only as comfortable or atrocious as you allow them to be. Women are indeed only as decent as their society demands them to be. Unless they have a higher standard set by the society, women will make sure that they all follow the lowest common denominator. Women of character are not born. They are made. And they are made by men of character. It usually does not go the other way. Single mothers are the worst influence on their own children because they never had a father figure to guide them and build them to be decent human beings. Absent a dad, these women will look for a daddy. Since they don't know what a positive father figure looks like, they look up to badboys, who are in their same moral league. Traditional women are not some perfect beings by default. They are made to be perfect through tons of effort. Without a patriarchal society and a strong father figure to enforce high standards, you cannot get a traditional woman. The problem with thinking that "If feminism was eliminated, we'll go back to an utopia" is that it assumes that women are decent human beings by default. They are not. And even if they somehow build themselves up to be decent human beings (which is very rare because hardship only increases bitterness in women and not moral strength), it might very well be too late for them since time does not work on their favor as it does for men.

Good girls:

Third world women who are taken out of their societies and placed in first world countries are very good examples of this. Their character and good nature was only because of the environment they lived in. Women are like water. They will take the form of the container you pour them into. For a third world woman to maintain her good character even in a first world country, she needs to be placed in a community heavy with her native people who will still hold her accountable to their culture.

Women primarily look for protection, provision and validation from their men and their society. The behavior of women heavily depends on these factors and especially on where she derives her validation. If her validation comes from a functional structure, like a patriarchal society or a family, she will be a "good girl". If it is not, you will see a race to degeneracy because while men tend to uplift each other, women tend to drag each other down to eliminate competition.

In traditional societies, women used slut shaming as a means to eliminate competition. While men might not marry sluts, they do not mind them and do not have to shame them. They would just take what a slut has to offer and be content with that. In feminist societies, the shaming is directed towards feminine, stay-at-home women.

Feminism and families:

Even for you to eliminate feminism, you need to establish a patriarchal society first. You need to make families cool and respectable so that she will be eager to get her validation from that system. This is, needless to say, an almost impossible undertaking in a society that has devolved into sexual degeneracy.

If you want to start a family, consider the character of the girl and especially where she derives her need for validation from. You stand a better chance when you choose a feminine girl who submits to your authority rather than a feminist cunt who will hesitate to take your name.

The concept of "courting process" was used to vet a woman to see if she had the necessary qualities to be a good wife. This process was not, in itself, something that was supposed to provide validation to a woman's ego by having the man chase her. You will need to vet the girl thoroughly before you give her any commitment. Remember that women are experts at pretending to be exactly what you are looking for. Take the fact that majority of women do not identify as feminists for an example. Just because women tell you that they are no longer feminists does not mean that they are going to stop acting like feminists. It just means that they will not identify as one. The silent majority of women indeed do not identify as feminists. Does that mean feminists are a minority? No. It just means that most women would rather not outwardly identify themselves as feminists. While most women might not agree with the feminists out loud, they keep quiet because it is to their advantage. When unopposed and unregulated, these outspoken feminists do end up giving the silent women more rights than they had before. And in their thinking, by staying silent they can maintain the plausible deniability if feminism goes south tomorrow. Their hope will be to nawalt their way out of the feminist mess. So while they might not openly oppose or accept feminism, they will maintain silence until they stand to benefit from it. You need to strip women of their plausible deniability to see what they will be willing to do.

If any woman is telling you that she is traditional, tell her that she is secondary to her husband. Her answer to that will tell you all you need to know. Matter of fact, a good litmus test I use to smoke out faux-conservatives is to tell them that in a family, the kid takes more priority than the wife. To pussy-worshipers, this is anathema. To them, it's always the wife first, the kid second and the man last. In any patriarchal society, it's either the man or the kid first, the other the second and the woman last. Women who identify as traditional for the convenience of it have trouble actually submitting to a man.

On women improving themselves:

Even the popular manosphere forum of redpillwomen, which is touted to be a woman's equivalent of trp, is not about maintaining the innocence of a girl. No. It is about teaching sluts ways to mimic themselves as a traditional woman. I have touched on the topic of redpillwomen extensively in this post and in this comment that was derived from the previously mentioned post. A RPW, in my opinion, is not even close to what a traditional woman is. RPW, in my opinion, are not as genuine or as desirable as good women who were brought up in traditional families raised by strong fathers. They're merely attempting to pass themselves as one. They are not as kind, not as pleasant and not as innocent or sweet because they did not have a strong father to protect them. The latter does not even know RPW exists because they have no need for it.

Men need to build themselves up. Women need to stay innocent.

Women (in general and especially the RPW kind) are notorious for taking good advice, molding it to fit their hypergamous desires and purpose whilst calling themselves enlightened. In an age where female independence and choice addiction is the thing, women need to feel as if they are setting the conditions to even submit whereas in truth, all they actually need to do is to submit. The fundamental defining element of feminism is the refusal to submit.

A fish cannot teach a fisherman how to fish. In attempting to do that proactively, women are setting themselves up for failure (when they try to teach a beta on how to lead or when they attempt to condition an alpha to their desires) or redundancy (when they attempt to teach an alpha how to lead or attempt to condition a beta on their desires). Truth be told, women do not have much choice in this equation other than to submit. This is why traditional societies spent huge effort in keeping women as innocent as possible. The idea that women need to condition themselves for marriage is just another variation of the maturity myth phenomenon that I have written about.

Men look for innocence/helplessness in women. Women look for mastery in men. Men want a woman they can build up. Teach things to. Women look for such a man. If a woman is already "mature", then a guy has nothing to invest on. There won't be any healthy bonding that happens between a benevolent mentor and an impressionable apprentice. He will invest just enough to get sex. And that will be it. Even if these red pill women succeed in creating a loving bond with their alphas, it will be nowhere as strong or genuine as the bond between the same alpha and an innocent woman. Women fail to understand the importance of innocence to a man and the attractiveness it brings and thus, by themselves, can never make themselves attractive to a man in the same way a traditional woman can. It should be clear that traditional women are not default women. They are an end product of a carefully constructed structure that aims to deliver a high quality product from raw material.