I know this is not primarily a dating sub, and that there many (even arguably more important) issues to discuss. But it is one that is frequently talked about nonetheless. A lot of people, especially guys in their 20's like me, or even older, care about it a lot. And for good reason. I think a lot of misandry is prone to express itself quite profoundly in the dating sphere as well, so it could be indirectly beneficial to address.

Additionally, a lot of young men like myself don't find groups like this immediately because the pills (blue, red, and black) and their respective subreddits are more visible. As a result, it's really easy to get sucked into the misogyny and extremism that r/theredpill or r/mgtow offer, or the blind naivete that is the blue pill.

By marketing ourselves with our own pill, we could potentially prevent this. Especially since the other pills are all very flawed in their own ways (more on that in a second). I don't think any of them adequately represent a truly egalitarian/male advocate mentality, and we could capitalize on that vacuum to offer an alternative and carve out a more visible identity for ourselves. I think that most men are simply looking for a sympathetic answer that validates their pain, and would gladly chose one that doesn't come along with the baggage of misogyny if it were available.

I'm sure most of us are familiar with the philosophy of each pill, so I don't feel the need to go into extreme detail, but I will briefly describe each and why I think it is inadequate.

Blue pill is probably the easiest to understand, since it ignores gynocentrism and the disadvantages men face entirely. It doesn't have a sexism problem with women, but I'd argue that since it doesn't acknowledge the issues that face men, it is at least implicitly misandrist.

Red pill is willing to acknowledge gynocentricism and female advantage in the sexual markeptlace, but I'm sure we can all agree that it goes too far by likening women to sociopathic robots that coldly seek as much advantage as possible in relationships through whatever means necessary. It also leans heavily into biological determinism by attributing this to an immutable "female nature". Essentially, the answer it offers is to "play the game" (PUA) rather than try to change the game itself. It's worth mentioning that MTGOW is also red pill; they recognize the rules of the game, and that they could play it, but they just don't think it's worth playing.

Black pill is much like the red pill, but even worse. Along with all the sexist black-and-white assumptions, it's also telling men that "it's hopeless". The game exists, but only a rare few can actually play it, so just give up. And while lookism is true to some extent, it's far too simplistic on top of encouraging people to wallow in depression. One need not even mention any of the incel terms like "femoid" which is obviously ridiculous.

So my question is, why should it be so hard, then, to come up with our own version? One that says "ok, there is misandry/gynocentricism, but it's mostly attributable to an extremist ideology that hijacked the narrative and can be changed, rather than any kind of innate female horribleness". One that denies biological determinism, approaches the issue from an egalitarian view, shows how things harm both men and women, and actually tries to change things rather than giving up?

What I wrote in the last paragraph is certainly how I feel, and how I'd imagine a lot of fellow users feel based on what I have seen. Am I mischaracterizing our stance? Is it not as homogenous as I'm saying it is? Also, please forgive me if this topic has come up before.