What is The Red Pill?

Full article here: https://blacklabellogic.com/2019/06/12/what-is-the-red-pill/

Excerpt:

Like I said initially, I used to see “The Red Pill” as a descriptive praxeology, however, I’ve come to realize that we need to split this up a bit more. Because we do have a lot of components here.

A) The descriptive praxeology that describes the reality of intersexual dynamics.

These are the contents that seek to describe the mechanisms at play, and their given effect. For instance, describing the mechanics of hypergamy and solipsism and how they influence the mating market.

B) Various perspectives on how one should utilize the information from A.

These are those contents that seek to describe how to put yourself in an advantageous market position to exploit the core mechanics. For instance, how to deal with hypergamy in an LTR, what to do to maintain her preference for you as her chosen partner, and how it affects her mate choices.

C) Various individuals and groups that utilize A as part of their foundational material, but who have added other elements to build a full individual or group ideology.

This includes all the content that brings in philosophy not pertaining to strict epistemology and logic applied specifically to the area of intersexual dynamics, such as conservativism, liberalism, fascism, liberalism, progressivism and various religious or spiritual doctrines. (List not exhaustive)

D) Various hucksters, cult leaders, scam artists, con-men, and opportunists who utilize brand to benefit themselves only.

This includes the content that only seeks to exploit the branding side and that add components that are not related to intersexual dynamics to build a value proposition to make a sale, or to encourage a group identity where they can elevate their position to one of high status.

You should read the full post https://blacklabellogic.com/2019/06/12/what-is-the-red-pill/

My thoughts:

I've noticed the more I read the twitter personalities who hijacked our nomenclature tend to be all prescriptive in their discussions and almost none of them care about individual choice let alone the underlying theory on any of their ramblings.

They put their weight behind action plans and try to make their own lives the example and therefore cookie cutter that all should follow.

One guy comes to mind, his relentless preaching on why a good marriage is the best and how society and divorce is all just because you didn't try hard enough and we should double down on our efforts is exactly the sort of stuff we worked hard to keep out. He brags a lot and it pains me to think that he'll eventually have his AWALT moment at some point. Maybe not. But TRP's predictive power is rarely wrong.

Above all else, I am firmly in category A, however I enjoy seeing people's approaches in cat B. This is where people get confused. I've had people repeatedly ask me why we have a MGTOW tag, because it's so antithetical to getting laid. I like having opposing viewpoints on what to do with this information. Moving into the woods to be a hermit is the polar opposite of going clubbing every night to get laid. But both are decisions only you can make for yourself.

When somebody tries to steer the community by saying "this is the only right way" then we've got a problem.

We talk about spinning plates, mtgow, pickup, and even LTRs. None of these are the same goals or strategies but they all utilize the same underlying philosophy.

I personally talk about building power and tribes, which I suppose is my contribution to cat B/C on this front. I will continue to do so. Big news on this front soon...

The reason why I take a stand against many in cat C + D is because they ditch a lot of the truth and opt for comfortable lies in doing so. They enter into platitude city and you're just sticking your head in a new bucket full of blue pills. You cannot advocate marriage even if you personally decide to give it a try. Because the risk profile does not align with what we talk about here. Sure you can try it, but imagine if somebody had read a book on probability and said "you know my takeaway from this? I should invest my life savings into scratch tickets."

This isn't a moral judgement. This is a logical extrapolation on the truths we discuss here.