Similarity between redpill and malevolent sexism, counter-dependent personality? And redpillwomen and benevolent sexism, codependent personality?

mitreddit · 2014-08-12T12:48:51+00:00

read these articles and see if you find similarities......

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

Here's my issue with what you are implying. Most relationships are characterized by the narcissist/borderline (spectrum) dynamic which is described in the sources you site. And those relationships are by definition co-dependent, in that both partners have an unhealthy emotional reliance/attachment to the other person.

These emotional problems are not necessarily related to people's personal ideologies in an easily intelligible way. For example, at the university I attended, there way this guy who "pumped and dumped," manipulated, and sexually assaulted a ton of girls. He was also the most well known male feminist on campus. That's not to say that ideology doesn't fulfill some kind of emotional need. It's just not as clear as "he hates women well he must be redpill."

And I don't see TRP/RPW at the level of theory as being particularly entitled. I mean the common criticism of RPW is they are too obsessed with pleasing their man. And TRP has a significant focus on personal accountability, and earning sex by making yourself more attractive. You can disagree with what they say works, but it's not entitled.

Does that mean there aren't crazy entitled people on TRP? Of course not. There are crazy, entitled people in every community especially on the internet. Look at /r/TumblrInAction.

[–]mitreddit[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

what's your evidence that most relationships are characterized by the narcissist/borderline spectrum? And are you implying that most men are narcissists in a relationship, and most women borderlines? I might be willing to agree that most unhealthy relationships slant to that dynamic, but not healthy relationships. A healthy relationship involves two people capable of being on their own, that respect one another and choose to be together. They don't need to entangle each other in some counterdependent/codependent dynamic because they are both so weak inside, so weak on their own.

if you think men and women are different AND unequal, than i don't know how you could say you don't favor a dominance/submission, counterdependent/codependent relationship model because without equality, their can't be a reciprocal relationship.

do you think rp/rpw, in general, thinks men and women are different and equal? or different and unequal?

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Just personal experience. And yeah women tend to act as borderlines more and men as narcissists. What I mean is that most relationships (a slight majority) are unhealthy in the sense that they are comprised of two people with unresolved family of origin issues. Each person unconsciously tries to get the unconditional love they didn't get from their parents from their partner, and they usually both rely of false selves that were erected in childhood to protect the self from emotional pain. This leads to a very unhealthy dynamic.

Most redpillers think that men and women are of equal worth but different. There are exceptions though. I've encountered redpillers who think men are superior. RPW women definitely don't think men are superior. In general, TRP believes in the captain/first mate relationship model, and that's not inherently dysfunctional or unhealthy.

I think you are misunderstanding the relationship between narcissists and borderlines though. It's not about dominance and submission at all. It's about both partners inappropriately using the other to meet ancient emotional needs. If anything the borderline is usually the dominate one. This essay explains the dynamic pretty well.

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Well I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the level of dysfunction in the contemporary west. I don't doubt most relationships appear healthy on the outside, but given the divorce rate, number of psychiatrists and psychologists practicing, and my experience with people I just don't agree that most relationships are functional.

first mates are not equal to captains, whereas ying and yang are equal, so this model is based on inequality, which is not healthy and contradicts your assertion that redpillers think men and women are equal.

I don't see how it's based on inequality. The relationship between a CEO and COO isn't based on inequality. Each person just specializes in a different conceptual aspect of the relationship/business. Equality in this sense does not mean exactly the same. That's no different than yin and yang. It just means of equal worth and esteem. The captain and first mate are equally necessary for the ship to function. It's a model that is meant to make managing a household easier, not an argument for the intrinsic betterness of men.

[–]mitreddit[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I feel the need to point out that China has historically had some of the least equal relationship structures (foot binding anyone?)

ying and yang have equal power (while being opposites/different); a captain and a first mate don't (even though they might be equally necessary for the functioning of a ship, which you could say the same of the bolts on the hull).

You're mixing these comparisons pretty badly. Yin and yang are energies. A husband and wife are people. Bolts on a ship are parts. People in any kind of relationship are going to have power issues. Energies and inanimate objects do not. Your bolt on a ship argument would imply that the CEO, COO, and the server structure of a company are equally necessary. They aren't. Servers and bolts are fungible. People are not.

A household is a lot like a ship or a business. Someone has to be in charge. There has to be some kind of structure that removes the power issues, and allows for decisions to be made and things to get done. Democracy is a terrible model for management. Especially with an even number of votes. That's why we have bureaucracy. TRP/RPW argues that more often than not the man being in the captain role is what the woman and man wants. The reason why it's not an abusive power structure is because it's totally consent based. The first mate can leave the dynamic at any time.

And anyway, this management dynamic is totally separate from the question of mental and emotional health. It's just one way to run certain aspects of a marriage or other relationship.

[–]mitreddit[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]nice_new_accountis not defined by a pill4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

In the USA, there are three branches of government. The President does have some unilateral power in some areas, but the 3 branches exist to temper his power, just as the POTUS tempers their power. Some would argue that the media is almost a 4th branch.

I think every family has different structures for who specializes in what. Absolute, equal sharing of all decisions isn't possible... and also isn't healthy. The best part of marriage is that there's a mutual respect and shared sense of power/responsibility, but also a trust that's strong enough so that in some cases a spouse can act unilaterally.

I don't see why those unilateral decisions are relegated to gender-specifc responsibilities. If I'm not home, my husband sometimes makes unilateral choices about dishes, dinner, or child discipline. If my husband is busy and there's a deadline, I make a unilateral decision about a bill or a car repair.

If one of us makes some unilateral decisions that the other doesn't like, we reassess our joint values. When we're both available, we often enjoy discussing decisions and making choices together on everything.

It seems like couples who don't do this must fundamentally disagree too much, or can't communicate properly, or simply don't have an interest in certain tasks.

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]un-affiliated1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

first mates are not equal to captains, whereas ying and yang are equal, so this model is based on inequality, which is not healthy and contradicts your assertion that redpillers think men and women are equal.

No job is equal to the CEO at a company, making your employment unequal, and also unhealthy? Are employees not equal as people, even though their roles are different and in an absolute sense, subordinate? Redpillers understand and appreciate the importance of roles and specialties in building a good team. Having a quarterback leading doesn't decrease the value of a defensive end.

Your strict interpretation makes almost every relationship unhealthy as hierarchies are a fundamental part of social order. Despite what you seem to believe, people can be happy, fulfilled, and happy, despite being in non leadership roles.

All that is required is mutual respect. The leader has to appreciate the work done by subordinates when it is done correctly, and subordinates have to recognize the leader's authority.

This whole post is a good example of why amateurs should stay away from diagnosing conditions over the internet. Everything has symptoms in common. Laymen with a website think every pain is cancer, and every relationship is abusive or psychologically unhealthy.

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tryin2figureitoutRP male since before it was cool0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stats1356 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]stats135-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Lets dissect the study. If we are to believe that "enititlement" leads to sexism. Then since "twenge found that individuals in their 20s were three times more narcissistic than those over the age of 60," today's generation should be more sexist than that of our parents or grandparents. But not a single study shows our generation to be more sexist than that of those before us. In other words the study is not consistent.

Even if we ignore the inconsistency, the study can easily be flipped over to state that those who believe that men and women are more identical (less sexist), are linked to depression (do not believe they deserve good treatment or are not "entitled" to anything whatsoever).

Leaving the most important for last, we have to dissect the terminology (My biggest problem with these studies). There is a reason I place quotation marks on "power" and "entitlement". As with most of these feminist articles , they will use buzzwords like rape, misogyny, entitlement, sexism, and etc. In the same way that rape usually translates into "girl being drunk," and misogyny into "not being nice to women for being a women," the article defines uses "entitlement" for desiring better treatment. What the article boils down to is taking the fact that who want more in life, also want more from the opposite sex and adding buzzwords into it. What this feminist influenced article has done once again is that a human base desire and added the tag of entitlement.

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If we are to believe that "enititlement" leads to sexism. Then since "twenge found that individuals in their 20s were three times more narcissistic than those over the age of 60," today's generation should be more sexist than that of our parents or grandparents. But not a single study shows our generation to be more sexist than that of those before us. In other words the study is not consistent.

The error in your thinking here is the implicit assumption that this is the only variable that leads to sexist beliefs. But that's not the case. Narcissism isn't the only variable that affects this.

That is why you compare to a control group. Narcissistic 20 somethings are more sexist than 20 somethings who aren't. You have to isolate that variable and compare it to a control. This shows that narcissism is correlated with increased sexist attitudes.

The fact that people in their 60s are both less narcissistic and more sexist doesn't discount the relationship for that one variable they were studying, because there are many other variables that lead to those views. It just means there are other reasons people in their 60s are more sexist. For example, traditional religious beliefs might be a stronger factor for sexist beliefs. So even though older people are less narcissistic, they are more religious, so they would still be more sexist. That's a completely made up example, but I hope it illustrates what I mean.

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]stats1351 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

i was actually curious whether you really believe men and women are different BUT equal and/or whether RP/RPW does (not society)? we could debate what equality means, but if you think equality is important/healthy and you believe men and women are equal (though different) great. obviously a lot of rp/rpw types don't think that, if you want to argue they are the minority, ok.

is it bad for a women to be a housewife? honestly, i don't think it is necessarily. i guess it's all about context. if the breadwinner/housewife model is based on an emotionally weak guy having to trap a financially (or emotionally) weak girl in that situation (and vice versa, because it's a mutually unhealthy model), that's different from an educated employable woman who could choose to be a housewife or choose to work, or a healthy male that doesn't have to entrap their mate (with games/manipulation). this whole concept of guy game, girl game, is rooted in exploitation. healthy people don't operate like that which makes me think many rp/rpw types come from abuse/neglect backgrounds that they think the world does, or should operate like that. the fact that abuse is linked to counter-dependent personality, and neglect is linked to codependent personality does seem to explain rp/rpw psychology to me pretty well.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

we could debate what equality means, but if you think equality is important/healthy and you believe men and women are equal (though different) great.

Equality could mean anything out of a list of "should have"s (societal, legal) and a list of "does have"s (neuro-, physiological). Believing in anything on List 2 without any real evidence is an obvious case of moralistic fallacy, and the outcome of List 2 can influence one's opinions of List 1.

Of course, if you think that List 1 should be influenced by List 2 (public policy on women should be based on the average woman), then you shouldn't have a problem with profiling men more for violence, etc, turnabout is fair play and all.

if the breadwinner/housewife model is based on an emotionally weak guy having to trap a financially (or emotionally) weak girl in that situation (and vice versa, because it's a mutually unhealthy model)

That's a pretty, uh, steep claim.

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TRPer690 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points3 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points3 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]CFRProflcopter( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

In that case, you probably should not have responded.

I think that some questions on PPD require you to make hypothetical assumptions. If you're unwilling to make those assumptions, then why respond? It's merely a hypothetical framework. Discussing within that hypothetical framework does not mean that you've accepted the assumption as true.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: For example, say someone asked, "If we make the assumption that women are hypergamous, what would be a logical dating strategy?" I think responding with "I'm not willing to make that assumption" is pointless. It's a hypothetical question. If you're unwilling to work within the bounds of the hypothetical question, then you shouldn't be responding. It's like those people on home renovation shows that complain about the initial color of the walls. Um...hello? We're going to knock down those walls so I don't think the color really matters at this point.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]mitreddit[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]aaron_the_justRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Similarity between redpill and malevolent sexism, counter-dependent personality? And redpillwomen and benevolent sexism, codependent personality?
Author	mitreddit
Upvotes	7
Comments	88
Date	August 12, 2014 12:48 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2dbwom/similarity_between_redpill_and_malevolent_sexism/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/similarity-between-redpill-and-malevolent-sexism.285110 https://theredarchive.com/post/285110

Comments