Woman encourages people to do things for their SO out of love not expecting something in return. Gets called out for being a Red Pill

ConfessionsOnAWhim · 2014-01-07T03:55:19+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Aitikulta · 2014-01-07T02:38:22+00:00

Something I will never understand about feminists is how they argue so hard that "they fought for equal rights and choice!1!1!!1".

Then as soon as a woman chooses to be submissive/SAHW/SAWM/etc, she is looked down on for making that choice. You can't have it both ways feminists. Part of giving people choices is that they won't always pick the one YOU like.

FleetingWish · 2014-01-07T05:32:42+00:00

Following something to it's obscene conclusion means there's something deeply buried underneath.

Let's take a simple feminist logical fallacy as an example. "Being nice to your husband" = "doormat/slave". What's the purpose of this equality? Equating it to the latter, means that they are trying to prevent the former. Why would any reasonable person want to prevent people from being nice to their husbands? It just doesn't make much sense if you look at it that way. I can think of two reasons why this might be.

They are afraid of being seen as a doormat. Women are submissive. Women know this and feminists know this. But admitting that you are submissive is frightening as hell, because at it's core, it's the acknowledgement that we obtain our happiness from other people. Submissive people get their happiness from making other people happy. This means, because we are submissive, we will never truly be happy without other people in our lives, and this would mean that women can never truly be independent of men (or at least not do so and still be happy). This would be brutal to the feminist movement if this truth was found out. Not only that, it would mean we would have to rely on men for our happiness, who could be abusers, rapists, axe-murders, and a host of other unpleasant things. Having to rely on a man for happiness means introducing another variable into your equation and relying on the fact that the variable is not a serial-unicorn-fucker. What this all amounts to is that we are given the message again and again, don't trust men, women don't need men, don't serve men. They wouldn't have to repeat this message to us ad nauseum if they weren't afraid that women would revert back to their natural instincts and do it. In other words, they wouldn't have to tell us to avoid men, if that's what we would do anyway.
They don't want us to make them look bad. The main problem with shouting from the roof tops "if you are nice to men, you are betraying woman kind" is that some woman will not listen. Sure, because women are submissive and people-pleasers, women won't want to be disapproved of by women who think serving men is "bad", but at some point they will reach a cross roads. Women one day realize that they not only want to the feminist women to like them, they also want men to like them, and they can't please both of them. The feminists want one thing, and the men want another. They have to pick one or the other. Unfortunately far too few pick to make men happy, but those who do make feminists look bad. We will cook, clean, keep it spicy in the bedroom, keep our waist-line intact, all for the purpose of serving men. Imagine how much of a better deal we look like compared to those advocating to "not do things for men". We'll not only be guaranteed men, we'll be guaranteed the best men. When the feminists decide to adopt a man who will follow their script, they quickly discover that the best men don't want them, and write articles asking "where have all the good men gone". The truth is they want attractive men just as much as the rest of us, but to work for it would be admitting submissiveness (see point 1).

Pink_acetaminophen · 2014-01-07T01:23:29+00:00

It's like feminist double speak. Doing good things for your husband is good. They label it Redpill which they themselves denote negatively. Somehow they make just the term Redpill sound bad and manage to turn things that are simple and common knowledge as good in to bad just by association. So weird.

2014-01-07T00:55:17+00:00

When feminists captured the narrative of the universe

2014-01-07T03:18:40+00:00

Why does it seem novel that a couple shares an account? I see couples share accounts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and more websites. It's not completely unheard of.

They're silly to think it's strictly RP. Even if I was a lesbian, I'd still be doing good things for my SO and wouldn't expect anything in return. They just seem to hate doing things for men while expecting nothing in return. Another lady? They'd be happy to oblige with helping out. I know my girls did when I was moving dorm rooms, but I bet if I was a guy and needed help, they'd spew out something how I could do it by myself since I'm a man.

The more I read feminist posts the more they make my blood boil and my head ache.

ozzieoo · 2014-01-07T05:44:15+00:00

Being kind is part of the human experience to me. For those who you respect, care about and love, you help make them smile, you make them laugh, you bake for him, He changes your oil or you change his oil and he bakes you a cake. Does it matter who does what? What matters to me is that we as people reach out and use whatever our talents are to enrich and ease the lives of those we care for.

Title	Woman encourages people to do things for their SO out of love not expecting something in return. Gets called out for being a Red Pill
Author	mistonag
Upvotes	29
Comments	37
Date	January 7, 2014 12:49 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RedPillWomen
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/1ul0u5/woman_encourages_people_to_do_things_for_their_so/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/woman-encourages-people-to-do-things-for-their-so.2026 https://theredarchive.com/post/2026

Comments