Psychology professor makes in-depth scientific analysis of the Red Pill vs Blue Pill debate, what do you think about it?

[–]the_them57 points58 points59 points 4 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

I think he put everything that we know in a nice box while providing solid examples that are often used within the communities he’s covering. Its very telling that he takes the time to talk about how science and scientific thought are among the first things to get dropped in this debate. As anyone who has spent any time in TRP, MGTOW, TBP, etc. knows, personal attacks are the most popular kind of argument and are often the first thing included in a comment discussion (even if the rest of the argument is entirely logical). If it’s impossible to have even scientists ignore their bias, then you’re not going to convince an angry commenter to acknowledge theirs, making the debates that happen in comments sections fairly pointless (except when it comes to personal anecdotes which can have a certain amount of intrinsic or empathetic value).

The unfortunate fact is that these communities exist because people are unhappy with the state of things and need a place to go to talk about them, usually when they’re already upset or angry which is rarely conducive to productive discourse. I left MGTOW even if I enjoyed certain pieces of the philosophy because of the sheer amount of pure rage and bigotry coming from men using the sub as a sanctuary to express their frustration. Its distracting and unproductive, but again, me telling a bunch of anti-semites that they shouldn’t hate Jews isn’t going to change their mind.

[–]VirginPrideWorldWide[S] 24 points25 points26 points 4 years ago* (48 children) | Copy Link

[–]piratelostboi2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DREADC0RSAIRNo Pill | Just Dead Inside6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

I've been on the MGTOW sub for awhile and I've never seen them say all women are less intelligent, all men are better at everything or call all women scum. Care to provide at least 1 example? I ask this because every time I do, no one can provide me that.

Let's do a quick top posts for the week check

r/MGTOW

One post about how they dont hate women but aviod them because of their behavior, A few ACTUAL deceptive behaviors clearly shown in some men's lives on video and in screenshots, a few jokes about women being hypocritical, a few jokes about men being happily single.

No hate speech, just men being glad they avoided the toxicities of how female nature CAN be.

r/Gendercritical

Trans hate speech, studies showing female altheletes don't like trans people, more trans are abominations posts, porn is bad posts, 1 I got full custody of my kid from his dad post(praising this as if it were an achievement)

The only personal takeaway I can take is that they hate trans women, and men.

Please look for yourself before drawing conclusions. Because MGTOW has never been about hate, its about why men choose to go their own way in the first place.

Or please, someone show evidence of men calling all women scum or dumb. Please link it

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect19 points20 points21 points 4 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

[–]DREADC0RSAIRNo Pill | Just Dead Inside9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

Did you read any of these posts? Are you for real

1st one was deleted by either the mods or the user himself, guys in the comments even told him to delete it or change the "All women are whores" title

2nd is obviously a cartoon and not a literal representation of ALL women or All vaginas. And women don't like man sluts either, women here even said they don't

3rd A former pretty woman got fat, all he said was she hit the wall. Not that she was an abomination of a person. How is this worse than top posts hating trans women? This isn't even popular no one cares

4th A guy was lead to believe a girl was a unicorn, went to meet up, she acted shitty to him. How is this hate

You provided zero evidence that MGTOW is what the OP claimed. As tempting as it is to disregard you as an idiot, I will let you try again. Spend more than 30 seconds next time, and sort by top because that's what general mgtow consensus is. Not a post an incel got through that no one cares about.

MGTOW has a mod team too, pure hate speech gets deleted there just as it get deleted here after awhile because that's not what MGTOW has ever been about.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Red__Blue0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red__Blue1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DREADC0RSAIRNo Pill | Just Dead Inside1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProteinPNo Pill1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_cri_evry_tim-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_cri_evry_tim-4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Criticalthinking3460 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How do you think it make a human feel to be shamed and told “they hit a wall” which first off is implying that their attractiveness is all that matters. That after a point you have no value no matter your accomplishments, education, contributions to the world. That your only worth is in your body. That the complexity and wonderment of being a living sentient being is nothing to men if your not 20, and active. All humans have schemas (core beliefs) that already tell them they aren’t worthy. We don’t need a group of resentful ass holes dehumanizing is us farther.

THIS is definitely all hate/resentment/dehumanizing/fucked up bullshit. Luckily for me I know resentment is like drinking poison and expecting someone else to die. I know that for all the sexist, bigoted, bullshit these types of groups spit forth they will never achieve contentment or happiness. No matter how they see me or people like me they will never have what I do. So even through all the hate/hurt they preach I feel pity for them. They waste their life’s on anger and will never have true intimacy.

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] -5 points-4 points-3 points 4 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

While referring to MGTOW, you say:

It's all hypocritical, to start with. Most of the men complaining would be aghast to see the female equivalent of these

Can you really say that though? I don't browse their subreddit, but isn't one of the main reasons that MGTOW exists the acknowledgement of those female equivalents? More specifically, a primary difference between the incel movement and the MGTOW one seems to be that MGTOW are wiling to accept those equivalences, leading them to not want anything to do with women. Incels do not, so they have a hypocritical views and an overall dislike of women. If they (MGTOW) were to be aghast by mention of these equivalents, wouldn't it be more logical for them to identify with the incel movement instead? Because the MGTOW movement does not strike me as being on the same page as the incel one, and I don't believe that what you said can apply to the MGTOW movement, as it contradicts its very nature. While you may argue that both movement may overlap with another to an extent, I still think there is a distinction to be made between them as ideologies.

I don't believe that shaming women or being a dick publicly is ok, but denying women for being fat or having too much sex is not any different than denying men for being short and not having enough cash. So long as both sides keep it to themselves, I think it is ok. And I would argue that people who identify with the MGTOW crowd are for the most part ok with both sides of the coin.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

“Loose vagina” is often used as the insult though—sure, it also is intended to shame promiscuity, but in a lot of cases it’s the supposed “looseness” itself that is supposed to shame the woman. I.e. that she is physically used up and unable to sexually please as a result. Logically it makes no sense—the vagina is full of muscles. It makes as much sense to say that having sex regularly will make a vagina looser as it would to say that regularly having your penis squeezed and compressed within various vaginas would make it smaller. Neither happens. There are two things that cause the vagina to become looser:

Age (as it’s muscle, and all muscles begin to deteriorate with age)
Natural childbirth (as opposed to C-section)

But having sex a total of 5 times with various people, or having regular sex over years with one single spouse, will not make a vagina looser or a penis smaller.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]piratelostboi0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]allweknowisD9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

In that case, wouldn't PGTOW (People Going Their Own Way) be more appropriate? Because that all applies to men, too. Women don't age less gracefully than men--no one ages gracefully. Men in their 40's and 50's look old and gross to me, even if they look good for their age. They looked even worse to me when I was still in college. Men go bald, they go gray, they wrinkle, they rarely adhere to proper skincare regimens, and many of them just let themselves go once they get past a certain age. No one--male or female--looks good when they're old. No one.

More importantly though, I think it's missing the point of most human relationships. I'm not engaged to my fiancee because I expect him to be young, beautiful, and fit at age 60. He's not expecting that from me, either. If all people had to offer others was their attractiveness, no one would get into LTRs. For most people, companionship is the true appeal. Someone to be able to come home to and depend on and share everything with, to laugh with, to have fun with, to spend time with for the rest of their lives. Being single certainly isn't bad, but there's nothing compared to waking up next to the love of your life and knowing that you both love each other immensely. That's what relationships should be about--not whether or not your wife is going to have smile lines in 10 years. Although if that's your priority, I would say it is definitely a good thing to go your own way, as there's no way to have a healthy relationship with that shallow and superficial of an outlook.

[–]we-are-men-with-ven8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I did a quick look at r/MGTOW sub at 9:00. This is what I found...

Fourth post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ctalkt/good_ol_darius/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share Top comment:

She is right....she didnt marry for money....she divorced for money!

Fifth post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ctak0h/lol_this_one_destroyed_me/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Top comment:

Bitxh needs time to hide the ugliness inside of her!! 😂

Her soul is damaged!! Thus all the preparation!!

Seventh post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ct8zh7/is_this_supposed_to_be_funny/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Top comment:

Arguing with a woman is like arguing with a toddler

Eighth post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ct30on/_/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Sixth comment:

Talk about a worthy cause feminist, lets get naked burn our bra, dye our hair all sort of colours and pretend we can live without men... good luck cunts when you try to move this fridge 3 stories high....

Tenth post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/csz5ar/dangerous_but_also_funny_dating_advice/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Couple of comments:

yeah more options to meet mentally ill fat single and now divorced moms hahahah

well, if you think that she still the same size as she was in her wedding, you are the rookie one.

Eleventh post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ct00ol/must_be_6_feet_and_fit/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Fourteenth post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ctb1f0/wildlife_alert/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

[–]chaddad90000 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]piratelostboi0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]the_them1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Did I say anything about “safe” spaces? You’re purposefully misinterpreting my comment to talk about your opinion, but I’ll respond anyway because I don’t entirely disagree. That being said, an angry comment is an angry comment and does no one any good. The funny thing is, any forum or group brought together around a central idea will have its own politics and acceptable discussion topics (i.e. your “safe space”). MGTOW is a great example because god forbid you take any stance that puts women (or Jews apparently) in any kind of positive light. You won’t get banned, but the pure vitriol you’ll receive is usually enough to shut down any chance of discourse. Every group has taboo topics and ideas that will get shut down without consideration because none of us are without bias and when surrounded by (perceived) like-minded people, humans feel comfortable expressing that bias. That is the very definition of a safe space.

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (112 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19906 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (87 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

I don't think women can ever comprehend the visceral fear and disgust a man feels when it comes to being cuckolded.

The closest parallel is how they react to the idea of "game." The core idea is, "let's figure out what women find attractive, and let's try to do more of that."

On the surface, this should be something women applaud. It's like if you're a fan of something and the company that makes it says, "we're studying your preferences so that we can give you more of what you like" - wouldn't that be a positive thing? But women object to the idea of game - the idea itself, regardless of specifics (which I'll address below). They label the very idea as "manipulative."

To give an example, let's say we're talking about confidence. You believe that women find confidence attractive, so you give a guy some advice on how to appear more confident. Women object because this feels inauthentic. "You manipulated me into thinking you were confident, when in reality you're shy."

And what's the real source of the negative feeling women have about this? It's a deep rooted, subconscious fear of wasted reproductive effort. Specifically, they fear they'll have a child who (absent the same advice his father got to "just pretend to be confident") will not be confident and therefore not attractive and therefore fail to reproduce. When compared to a man who was, for whatever reason (whatever genes contribute to this), just naturally super confident - his child will likely behave the same way with or without that extra advice.

For both genders (males with being cucked, and females with being gamed), the underlying instinctive fear is wasted reproductive effort.

For the blue pillers - I mentioned above that I would address specific objections you have, because I anticipate your response to this comment would be, "no, we don't object to the idea, we object to ____" where the blank is something specific.

My response is, no, you really do object to the idea itself, and I can prove it.

If the core idea is, "let's figure out what women like, and let's do more of that" then there are two possible outcomes: (1) we correctly identify things you like (2) we get it wrong, in which case we are not doing things you find attractive.

In criticizing TRP, if your claim is outcome (2) that outcome still isn't a problem for women - if we've got it wrong, then we're not attractive, and there's no problem.

It's like, imagine there's a group of women trying to increase their success at dating, and they proposed some theory about what men like but that theory was wrong. So for example, maybe they believe men like women who shave their head, smoke cigarettes, and curse like sailors. How should *I* react to the existence of this group? Should I be angry, the way you're angry about TRP? No. I would just laugh and say "that's not going to work" and then go on about my day.

And if you were really upset about the specifics of TRP, then you would react the same way. "I don't have to worry about these guys, because (outcome (2)) they aren't doing things I find attractive." But you are upset. The reason you're upset is because you fear outcome (1). But why should you fear outcome (1) if it's giving you things you like? The only reason is wasted reproductive effort.

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

It's clear that you've thought a lot about this, but not from the perspective of a woman. Respectfully, let me tell you why most of us find "game" reprehensible.

It's not because of "wasted reproductive effort." It's because it is insulting to half the population and demonstrates that you view women as non-human commodities. It's not about telling a guy to be confident--I'm a woman and have always told this to both male and female friends. I give tips that I believe will be helpful: Be friendly, be chill/casual, don't stress, be relaxed, etc. This works both ways. But plenty of TRPers and pickup artists will tell men to be assholes and neg women and treat them like crap in an effort to lower their self esteem and standards, and to make them insecure enough to seek external validation. All for an easy lay. I'm not going to argue the principles of TRP (even though I could and have argued a number of them before) because in this context it's not relevant. Even if those approaches worked and TRP was 100% correct about female attraction and sexuality, it's still organizing a vast community of men and instructing them essentially to treat women unkindly and how best to manipulate them for shallow reasons. There is no thought to how this might affect the woman's feelings, if it would hurt her, or if it could potentially leave long-lasting negative impacts on her.

there are two possible outcomes: (1) we correctly identify things you like (2) we get it wrong, in which case we are not doing things you find attractive.

(3) you hurt and/or jade the woman in the process of trying to manipulate her and give her trust issues as well as self esteem issues.

In criticizing TRP, if your claim is outcome (2) that outcome still isn't a problem for women - if we've got it wrong, then we're not attractive, and there's no problem.

See above.

And if you were really upset about the specifics of TRP, then you would react the same way. "I don't have to worry about these guys, because (outcome (2)) they aren't doing things I find attractive." But you are upset. The reason you're upset is because you fear outcome (1).

No, it's because:

we're offended by the inherent implication that we are all totally generic, passive pawns in some sex game to be toyed with;
TRP treats us like commodities to be consumed rather than people;
We are concerned and protective of the more vulnerable and naive/insecure among us who might fall for these tactics, only to be taken advantage of/hurt by men who ultimately see them as expendable and inferior. No woman should be in a relationship like that. It's not healthy.

I'm also going to go ahead and say that even if someone wants something that is bad or unhealthy for them, you shouldn't just give it to them in the hopes that they give you something you want (in this case, sex). There are people who want to drink themselves into an early grave. I wouldn't buy them a drink. There are people who want to try heroin. There are people who want to gamble every night. There are people who want to literally physically disfigure themselves. None of this is healthy behavior, and I wouldn't expect to see an entire online community crop up focused on enabling these people so that they can be taken advantage of.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Hey. Sorry for the delay in replying.

you view women as non-human commodities

What you need to understand is that this is not objective reality, it's just your opinion. And your personal opinion has no special privilege in this conversation.

Your personal opinion about TRP holds no greater weight than an incel's opinion about mainstream dating norms. When an incel observes that most women expect a man to pay for stuff, and the incel whines, "you view men as non-human ATM machines!!" that's just his personal opinion.

Women who are actually going on dates and expecting men to pay are not really viewing the men as ATMs. Right? The fact that this societal norm exists doesn't mean that you are dehumanizing men. Right?

No, of course not. You can be a moral person and recognize the value and person-hood of the man you're dating, and yet still prefer that he pays for dinner. The opinion of the incels holds no special privilege - it's not objective reality. You are free to disagree.

And I disagree with your characterization for the same reason.

Nonetheless, I do understand why you feel that way. We talk about women and dating and the process of attraction in mechanical, mathematical, and sometimes economic terms (you used the word "commodities"). There's actually a name for what we're doing (trying to do). It's called "systematizing."

In general, this is how men tend to make sense of the world. By contrast, women tend to be empathizers. Here's an article discussing this. Some portion of your objection to TRP is a reaction to the fact that we are thinking in a different way than you do.

But here's the thing: there's nothing wrong with the way I'm thinking. It works for me. Your way of thinking doesn't have some special privilege of being "the one correct way." It really doesn't matter that you don't like my way of thinking. It doesn't matter that it makes you uncomfortable - I'm not demanding that you use it. You go ahead and figure out human sexuality in your own way. More power to you. But when you find a group that is systematizing, you don't get to say it's morally wrong because it's different.

we're offended by the inherent implication that we are all totally generic, passive pawns

That's how an empathizer reacts to the way a systematizer sees the world. That is not how a systematizer actually sees the world. Every thing is different from every other thing, even when you categorize them. Hell, you could detect the difference between two ball bearings if you had the right equipment, and they are intended to be identical.

People who systemize don't actually think the things that you assume we're thinking. And your way of thinking doesn't have any particular moral high ground.

(3) you hurt and/or jade the woman in the process

That's not a (3) though. That would still be either (1) or (2) - it would either work or not.

It's like if I'm McDonald's and I'm trying to decide what kind of food to sell. I say there are two possibilities: (1) people will like this food and buy it (2) they wont like it and wont buy it. If you come along and say "or (3) they'll get fat!!" - uh no, that's not (3). That was (1) - they bought the food.

So, we can continue down this thread of the conversation if you can clarify that you mean "(1) TRP works ... but I still don't like it because it hurts women or leaves them jaded"

even if someone wants something that is bad or unhealthy for them, you shouldn't just give it to them

Wait, so McDonald's should be closed down because people get fat? Alcohol should be illegal because people get drunk?

You accuse me of commoditizing but I think you're infantilizing! I think people should be allowed to choose if they want to eat McDonald's and drink beer, and I don't think either McDonald's or bars are immoral businesses.

Of course, I understand why people crave McDonald's, and I understand how alcohol works. If you're claiming that (a) TRP works but (b) it's harmful to women then I think the much more interesting conversation is why something harmful works on women. What exactly is wrong with women, in your opinion, that makes them this way?

trying to manipulate her

lol. I'm not trying to manipulate her. I'm trying to behave in a way that she finds attractive. The only possible way that counts as manipulation is the way that grants the claim of my previous post: a deep rooted, subconscious fear of wasted reproductive effort.

So if you're conceding that then, I guess, thank you?

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Your entire comment makes me very curious as to what you consider "TRP" philosophy. I understand that what individual TRPers believe can vary minimally, but more often than not, the kinds of comments and posts I find are like what I describe. Let's take a look through The Principles of Game on Illimitable Men. Here are a few gems I think are obviously problematic.

**#02 – All bitches are crazy.**Stop trying to make sense out of nonsense, they’re out of their fucking mind.

If you put a woman first, she won’t appreciate that shit and ends up taking you for a sucker. But if you’re like “fuck it I don’t care what you need” they’re grateful for any little thing.

**#10 – Agreements with women don’t mean shit.**Don’t think that if you’re honest and they agree to it, that they’ll agree it to later, there’s no binding legal agreement. Women have integrity amnesia, whatever you decide the relationship will be in the beginning doesn’t mean a damn thing.

**#14 – Women pretend they don’t want sex.**It’s easy to control a woman’s body, but takes a real man to control a bitches mind.

**#15 – Women’s behaviour and personality mirrors you in a relationship.**A bitch is always a reflection of the guy that she’s fucking, they don’t really have set personalities.

**#17 – Feminine indifference is dangerous.**If you piss a girl off she’s more likely to fuck you.

You see women as better than they are, you think she’s worth so much more than she is. In reality it is you who is ascribing this extra value to her, she does not actually possess it. As an asset you are worth more than her, your value appreciates with age whilst hers depreciates.

Obviously, this isn't all of it. But these are principles and attitudes that I see reflected in the comments and posts of tons of TRP subscribers. Not only does barely any of the above have any basis in reality; even the way that women are spoken of is disgusting. Women are crazy, they're generic (as I said before), lack integrity, aren't as valuable as men, etc. etc. etc. Not to mention the amount of manipulation advised in the principles. (Piss her off, make her jealous, give her ultimatums, confuse her, set the standards and treat her poorly so she doesn't expect more from you.) Ironically, women are called "manipulative," but half of the philosophy revolves around manipulating women.

(3) you hurt and/or jade the woman in the process

That's not a (3) though. That would still be either (1) or (2) - it would either work or not.

You missed my point while inadvertently proving it. You're only considering the direct impact on you. There is zero consideration as to what other results it might have for her that you aren't party or witness to.

Of course, I understand why people crave McDonald's, and I understand how alcohol works. If you're claiming that (a) TRP works but (b) it's harmful to women then I think the much more interesting conversation is why something harmful works on women. What exactly is wrong with women, in your opinion, that makes them this way?

I never said TRP doesn't work on some women (although definitely not most women). I am sure that it does on a minority of women. There are women who seek out men who treat them like crap; they're abuse magnets. But that doesn't excuse the abuser for what he does, just because she's mentally damaged enough to desire it. The women who fall for TRP manipulations are weak and insecure. That's why it works on them. And that's precisely why it's more dangerous to them. The principles of "game" are utilized to break a woman down to a point where she "knows her place" like a good little wife, doesn't ever challenge her partner; where she's insecure and confused because he hits on other women or negs her in order to keep her self esteem low enough to stay with him. I've definitely been negged before by men trying to use "game" on me--of course it never worked, but I do very much pity the poor insecure woman who eventually succumbs to his manipulations. Not only that, but worse, the woman is with a man who considers her a crazy, emotional second-class person (worth less than men, remember) and who is a "depreciating asset." Not only that, but they advise bottling affection and pretending to be disinterested. I would never want a partner who thought of me this way or treated me like that. My fiancee and I adore each other, and we both let each other know. He is incredibly gentle, sweet, and patient, and I return the favor with him--because he treats me like an equal person. He loves to cuddle and snuggle and tell me he loves me. All of this only makes me more in love with him, not less. Being with someone who you adore and who adores you back is incredible. He makes me feel safe, loved, and 100% certain. If our relationship wasn't predictable after 5 years--if I wondered how he felt about me or what he wanted--then I would have left a long time ago. According to TRP, all of this is unattractive behavior on his part. I could not disagree more.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Here are a few gems I think are obviously problematic.

I want to encourage you to stop using the term, "problematic." The reason I'll give is the same criticism I made in my previous post: what you're saying isn't objective reality. You're just dressing up your personal opinion in a way that you hope gives it more credence. But it doesn't.

All you're telling me when you say "that's problematic" is that you personally don't like it. We can't have much of a conversation around that. You can list a bunch of things you don't like and I'll just say "*shrug* okay" and that'll be the end of it.

We need to talk about if something is true or false, if it works (meaning it achieves the goal of generating attraction), and sure we can also talk about if a thing is moral (provided we can agree on an underlying framework). But we can't have a conversation about things you just don't like.

what you consider "TRP" philosophy

As you probably know, the name is a reference to a scene in The Matrix. The idea is that the Matrix is a (sometimes pleasant) lie, the real world is a (sometimes ugly) truth, and "taking the red pill" is a metaphor for the desire to know the truth, even if it's ugly.

I believe that much of what constitutes mainstream, "acceptable" knowledge of human sexuality is wrong - basically lies, like the Matrix. There are two sources of these lies. First, our conscious minds are rational, but not necessarily cognizant of deep-seated drives originating in older parts of the brain. Secondly, starting in the late 1940s, behaviorists vastly overstated the malleability of culture and the effect of environment.

To me, TRP is the desire to know the truth about human sexuality, regardless of what that truth is (parts of it might be ugly, parts of it might actually preclude the possibility of achieving something I desire).

And when I say "desire to know the truth" that's a bit like a feminist saying, "legal and social equality for women." That's a core concept. You can go out and find TRPers saying stupid shit just as easily as I can go out and find feminists saying stupid shit. I presume that what you do with feminism is, you discard the crazy shit and retain the good ideas. I reserve the right to do the same with TRP.

I'm happy to tell you specific things I believe are lies, and specific things I believe are "red pill truths" (meaning, things not considered mainstream or acceptable). I'm also happy to look at things other people have said under the banner of TRP and I'll tell you if I agree with them or not.

I'll take a break for now, but will address the remainder of your post tomorrow if you like.

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"All bitches are crazy."

Meh. This statement is little different than what you'd find from a group of heterosexual women discussing their frustrations dating men. "Men are pigs - always thinking with their dicks." Whether the statement counts as part of TRP comes down to this:

barely any of the above have any basis in reality

I said that TRP is the desire to know the truth about human sexuality. So, is there any truth, any basis in reality for the statement you quoted?

The way I would say it would be - men and women tend to think in different ways. From either's perspective, the other way of thinking seems odd, and can be very frustrating. Surely you've heard the "it's not about the nail" joke - in which a woman wants to vent about a problem, but the man is fixated on solving it. From her perspective, he's not listening, not empathizing. And this bothers her.

So okay, it would be unkind of her to say "man are assholes; they never listen." But there is some basis in reality to her statement, isn't there? And if a man says "women are crazy; they just want to yap about problems instead of fixing them" I would label that similarly unkind.

I don't think the statement (or any of them: "men are pigs" or "bitches are crazy" or "they never listen") is itself part of TRP. I think the underlying truth is that men and women tend to have different ways of thinking, and different responses to stress. A useful strategy (for men) built from that truth would be something like, "don't insist on solving your girlfriend's problems"

So in summary, if your reaction to "all bitches are crazy" is mere offense, then my response is, "thank you for your opinion" and that's the end of the conversation. But if your reaction is "this has no basis in reality" then I disagree. The statement is unkind, certainly. The statement is not helpful, unfortunately. I'm sorry that other guy is not as articulate as we'd like.

[–]Raii-v2The Best Pill is Gold0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Raii-v2The Best Pill is Gold1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sexfarming0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sexfarming5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sexfarming0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol1990 1 points 4 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19900 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19901 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]gancska0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gopher_glitz18 points19 points20 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19902 points3 points4 points 4 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]FatChopSticks11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19903 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sexfarming0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rus9384Misanthrope3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NonconformingChad4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19900 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NonconformingChad3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19901 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol1990 1 points 4 years ago [recovered] (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol1990 1 points 4 years ago [recovered] (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol1990 1 points 4 years ago [recovered] (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol19900 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]lurflyDevil's Advocate-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]lurflyDevil's Advocate1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]duffmanhb4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]sogol1990 1 points 4 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]duffmanhb1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It’s obviously not that say to change. Our first line of thinking happens in the center of the brain... it’s like the lizard brain. The outer brain is actually the last region to have thoughts passed through. Often what we think is us being conscious intelligent thinkers is really just our lizard brain delivering a message and our frontal lobe intellectually rationalizing the decision. This is a well known process. It’s why addiction is so strong because addiction impacts that core part of the brain by rewiring functions related to fight or flight, happiness, and excitement. Addicts know what they are doing is hurting them via thought in the frontal lobe, but the lizard brain is so strong, and first to process thoughts, that it’s hard to rationalize away that addictive motivation.

This is why we have fat people who struggle to lose weight. They know they just need to eat healthy, hell, everyone knows we should be eating lean meats, vegetables, and minimal carbs and processed food. Our logic tells us we aren’t in a feast and famine world any more so we should be eating foods that optimize our health. Yet our cortex is is so powerful by managing our emotions and being the first part to process information, that it will still result in me eating a burrito tomorrow even though I know it’s logically not good for me. A fat person wanting to lose weight will still feel that instinctive pressure to eat more. It’s not easy to override. Hell, in sales there is a concept of “sell them emotionally and they’ll use their logic to rationalize their emotional decision”. It’s a known mechanism and it’s powerful.

So no. It’s not that easy as just being logical. We are still animals with animal brains. Our logic is just an added layer at the end of all thoughts. So when we know we can still just DNA test a child, that instinctive worry is still there. It’s difficult for most to push away an instinctive feeling. It’ll never go away in our species. It’ll always exist because it’s part of our core wiring, the same way our love for sugar is deep in the code.

[–]sogol1990-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]javigotBased & BlackPilled6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostModernCommieAnarcha-Femimnist (They, Them)-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]javigotBased & BlackPilled3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostModernCommieAnarcha-Femimnist (They, Them)-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]javigotBased & BlackPilled3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]_van_lifestyle_-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

every man can find out if their child is theirs by dna test, this should be out of discussion in our century .why do you bring this up?

DNA tests are illegal in most if not all western nations. A man cannot get a DNA test done without the explicit permission of a woman or a court.

Some of the largest most powerful women's activist organizations are the ones who have forced this to be the case. They lobbied hard for ages to prevent access to men having a paternity test done.

What makes it worse, is that anytime men talk about how ridiculously misandrist this state of affairs is, shitstains like you come in and try to shut down the conversation. You do this by spreading lies and falsehoods and trying to play the victim (just like you have been through this entire thread).

Just look at you here, you are literally trying to shut down a conversation about paternity tests simply because you have the empathy of a turnip and cannot understand that men actually want to know they are the fathers of the kids you demand they pay for.

Its misandrists like you which is why men need to keep "bringing this up". I think its disgusting that you are literally advocating men not even TALK about their issues, simply because it threatens your power in this matter.

The absolute and overwhelming ignorance that women have about the topic of paternity is stunning. The sheer and absolute lack of empathy women have for men in this matter is just mind boggling.

It makes me sick to know people like you work so hard to control the narrative about this topic.

Women never have to deal with false maternity. They should basically just shut the fuck up about paternity tests and any discussion about them.

No penis. No opinion.

[–]lefactorybebe1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Psst.

As a fellow researcher, I may say, we cannot say anything otherwise without heavy consequences.

The academia is a power struggle which like the political landscape is filled to the brim at the top with the ideologically inclined people. Thus, until we are in the height or end of our careers(Peterson's and Baumeister's case), most of us do not show our real views, and chant with others in order to get ahead in life.

You will never know the real views of a researcher in social media without anonymity or some kind of close relationship. We are not stupid. We hide our real views in order to avoid such problems with our superiors, our research funding and our livelihoods are dependent on their approval after all.

Case in point. Do you even know Roy F. Baumeister? He is one of the most famous professors of psychology in the world. He was the first to publish the red pill theory and not be discredited and trashed into academic oblivion. Did you wonder why the article discussing AF/BB and hypergamy is from 2017? Because he is at the height and end of his career. Receiving some of the highest remarks as a researcher possible. None in their right minds can touch him.

Me and other common researchers? We would lose our PhDs and our careers. It is a political landscape in the academia, and the politically inclined and the people who hide their views are the ones who play this game, the thing is, none is sure whom is whom.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]CatchPhrazeRed is For Rudolph5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]CatchPhrazeRed is For Rudolph-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ingelri2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jackandjill22Red Pill misanthropic, contrarian1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]OatsGYOWMGTOW[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lemonfluff0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]meeselbon5733 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We are not scared of ideologs like feminists. We are fucking terrified.

Every year one of us speaks up and is easily shut down, unable to get the simplest of jobs. Faded into the rising numbers of unemployed PhDs.

You needed Fucking Baumeister, A Fucking multiple award winning psychologist to be able to put TRP on the academia without being torn into pieces and thrown on the fire. And even him was heavily criticized and almost lost his job in Florida university.

The F do you expect us, mere local researchers, to do? Rise up? You kidding right? Our whole career are dependent on our peer recognition as researchers. You just need one lying ideolog to destroy us. We will never do it. Not unless we are in the heights of our careers, like Beumeister and Peterson, at least. We drop the bomb and just retire. This is the world of academia.

[–]meeselbon5730 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deviss2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]meeselbon5730 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]meeselbon5732 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

It can, just not the entirety of it.

Data is king in the academia, liking it or not. Ideologues can suspect of data but not disregard it if there is enough evidence. Think of how evolution got its place as a major theory. To ideologues, If there is the possibility to use data for politics, you use it, but every now and then correct data shows up like in Baumeister's case. Which cannot be easily dismissed. Then truth will transpire. A opened window will never be closed down.

Case in point. Evolutionary psychology was just like that. The guy was destroyed but the data was strong, thus none could overwrite it. It survives alone on data. Even the worst of ideologues cannot make it go away as the data is clear. It. is. a. Thing.

No amount of ideology can surpass the strength of data.

That is why economics, management, and behaviorist psychology are still subjects. None can seriously say these areas aren't heavily supported by data analysis. And believe me, now that Baumeister is supporting the SET, there is no going back.

Ideologues can slow down the progress, and maybe make it roll back a bit, but scientific knowledge will advance regardless of their interest or actions. After all. Truth is how you get to explore and get returns.

[–]meeselbon5731 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_them21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_them12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]brokegradstudent_934 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]VoteLobsterFlying Purple People Eater1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]darudeboysandstormSoup on the stove, bread rising, apple pie-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MoodyBrizo 1 points 4 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]VirginPrideWorldWide[S] 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Violetta3112 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]meeselbon5730 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JawsOfTheMachine1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]datingapppro3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]we-are-men-with-ven9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]we-are-men-with-ven0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheJim66Red God-Emperor of Slut Country5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheJim66Red God-Emperor of Slut Country0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheJim66Red God-Emperor of Slut Country0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheJim66Red God-Emperor of Slut Country-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salty-Bastardjust an excitable boy6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProteinPNo Pill1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModeratorBiased Against Humans[M] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rabidstuffy1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AndemanMan4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]meeselbon5730 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]piratelostboi0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have an observation I've been thinking about for a while in regards to the mindset coming from the people in these redpill, incel, or MGTOW places. It's about promiscuity in women. The assumption from most of these types is that women are attracted to an 'alpha' exclusively. This is sort of the hetero-normative standard. It's backed up so strongly in mainstream porn and almost all heterosexual media narratives. I think this culturally plays a massive factor in why promiscuity is viewed as so bad in women. Because the assumption is no matter what in a heterosexual relationship the male has more power, is more aggressive, more alpha, and basically in control. This is mostly never even questioned. It's not even questioned that this is what a straight woman is attracted to. So from the start of understanding a woman's sexuality there's the assumption she's going to want to be dominated. Female sexuality is viewed as passive because it has such high value but that also means that she has no choice ultimately because her "biology" drives her towards a Chad.

You can really see how this works in these manosphere places when you start to discuss with them transgender issues. A mtf is seen as bad because this person is somehow "lowering" themselves to become female; but also a ftm is seen through the same "failed male" lens as a mtf. This is really basic transmisogyny, which lays out that femaleness is seen as an accessory to manhood; which goes back to what he was saying about women being denied personhood.

[–]MisterJose0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Psychology professor makes in-depth scientific analysis of the Red Pill vs Blue Pill debate, what do you think about it?
Author	VirginPrideWorldWide
Upvotes	72
Comments	185
Date	August 21, 2019 1:57 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/cta31l/psychology_professor_makes_indepth_scientific/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/psychology-professor-makes-in-depth-scientific.254353 https://theredarchive.com/post/254353