TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

21
22

[–]telnet_reddit_80 11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

He really butchered that crab basket metaphor. The point is not that

when you are all striving for the same goal, and that resource is inherently limited

the resource is limited, or that only one crab can succeed. No, every crab, or at least many crabs, could succeed

The metaphor refers to a pot of crabs. Individually, the crabs could easily escape from the pot, but instead, they grab at each other in a useless "king of the hill" competition which prevents any from escaping and ensures their collective demise.

but instead of organising to enable each other's success, they drag each other down and everyone loses. The limit is not imposed externally.

I have noticed it a lot in manosphere writing: I sympathise with the sentiment, and agree with the conclusion, but the article is rambling, somewhat off point, and littered with unnecessary insider terms and initialisms, especially initialism. It's like <pop psychology> they didn't really want any outsiders to understand </pop psychology>.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

He tends to ramble. Good sentiment if you wade through it.

[–]TRP Vanguardtheubercuber 5 points6 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Great article but them using "FSM" was by no means helpful to me

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I always hate when people abbreviate in writing.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

He did use it spelled out the first time. My own personal preference would be to do something like this:

The Female Social Matrix (FSM) is ubiquitous. From its humble origins at church socials and various sorts of "bees", through it's matriculation in the 1960s, to it's full-fledged entry into the workforce in the 70s and 80s, the FSM is everywhere

At that point you'd know for sure what FSM means and it would flow more naturally.

Sucks repeating it every article as a writer, but it allows people who are new to your ideas to follow along.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

All I could think was "Flying spaghetti monster."

Regardless, his point was spot on.

[–]josephtkach 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

"Finite State Machine"

[–]AlwaysLateToThreads 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

FREE SUPER MAN!

[–]TRP Vanguardtheubercuber 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that's what kept throwing me off

[–]FountainsOfFluids 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's painful to read, mostly because I can't see anything described that men don't also do. Maybe the second half was more about female specific traits, but I couldn't force myself to get there.

[–]Endorsed Contributorracontemoi 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Awesome article. There's a great book called Chimpanzee Politics, written in the early '80s, by a zookeeper.

He got a ton of flak from feminists at the time for enforcing patriarchal chimpanzee society. For the good of the chimps, you see?

Anyways, it's worth looking up on Amazon. But very similar issues between artificially matriarchal chimps and women in the workplace.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter