Red pill: if women are inferior to men then how come you need a whole community and a strategy to deal with them?

2014-08-02T22:16:53+00:00

While the words are rarely spoken outright within the subreddit (that would make them look bad), it is often assumed that women are inferior to men within the...

[–]an_absolute_roseRed Pill Boy38 points39 points40 points 11 years ago (170 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (165 children) | Copy Link

[–]gwizmcpyroRedpill w/o the whining16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (108 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago* (106 children) | Copy Link

[–]Invalidity10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (71 children) | Copy Link

[–]Greyletter18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]squishles4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]squishles0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]squishles0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Greyletter0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

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

love·ly ˈləvlē/ adjective adjective: lovely; comparative adjective: lovelier; superlative adjective: loveliest

1. exquisitely beautiful. "you have lovely eyes" synonyms: beautiful, pretty, attractive, good-looking, appealing, handsome, adorable, exquisite, sweet, personable, charming; More enchanting, engaging, winsome, seductive, sexy, gorgeous, alluring, ravishing, glamorous; informaltasty, knockout, stunning, drop-dead gorgeous; killer, cute, foxy, hot; formalbeauteous; archaiccomely, fair "a lovely young woman" scenic, picturesque, pleasing, easy on the eye; magnificent, stunning, splendid "a lovely view" antonyms: ugly, hideous informal very pleasant or enjoyable; delightful. "we've had a lovely day" synonyms: delightful, very pleasant, very nice, very agreeable, marvelous, wonderful, sublime, superb, magical; More informalterrific, fabulous, heavenly, divine, amazing, glorious "we had a lovely day" antonyms: horrible

noun informal noun: lovely; plural noun: lovelies

1. a glamorous woman or girl. "a bevy of rock lovelies"

...yeah that's not really positive so much as THEY'RE HOT WHAAAAAAAA.

Plus, what do you mean, "are"? Don't you mean, "can be?"

Your statement is a joke, yes?

Can I just ask how old you are? I've been debating on here a bit and I am dubious of TRP's mean age. Nobody in TRP is a prodigy, I can tell you that much. If they were, they wouldn't be fixated on their ding dong and feeling special when they put it in people.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Invalidity0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Greyletter2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Is it negative because TRP seeks to identify gender specific roles?

No, it's negative because the differences are exclusively negative. What TRP "seeks to do" is irrelevant to whether what it actually does is negative.

Men are expendable,

What?

hence, men work to provide resources for their families.

Men work to provide for their families because that's what society teaches. Oh, FYI, that has been changing in recent decades.

Women are the only people that can give birth; men cannot give birth.

Ok...

When a woman works, she is inducing stress upon herself, both physically and mentally. That makes for a negative environment when it comes to caring and raising for a child. If a woman wishes to work, she should be afforded the opportunity to do so, hence, what early feminism was about. But a woman working is not optimal in any sense.

Why doesn't the man stay home, raise the kid, and take care of the house while the woman works? If you remove the feminine nouns and pronouns and replace them with male ones in those sentences, they remain just as true.

That's only one example of several handfuls of differences between men and women. There is nothing negative about it, unless you choose to spin it negatively.

I just don't understand how don't see "Men are expendable" (which necessarily means "men are expendable to women" since we are talking about male-female relationships) and "women should stay home, make babies, and raise children" as negative.

How about... a man and woman get married and don't have children? How about... a man and a woman get married, adopt a baby, and the man stays home to raise it because the woman has a much more lucrative career?

[–]Invalidity1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, it's negative because the differences are exclusively negative. What TRP "seeks to do" is irrelevant to whether what it actually does is negative.

What is discussed in TRP is to the benefit of its members. There is nothing to discuss about positive traits. If it is positive, it is beneficial to us, and there is nothing further to discuss about it. Hence, in a subreddit dedicated to understanding female behavior and general problems in society, the focus will be more on the negative aspects than on the positive.

Why doesn't the man stay home, raise the kid, and take care of the house while the woman works? If you remove the feminine nouns and pronouns and replace them with male ones in those sentences, they remain just as true.

The man can stay home and raise the kids if he wants to, but we are not saying that he cannot. But do you believe this ideal for most women? If I were to survey a large sample of women, they would likely prefer to have a man who works and makes more than she does. Why? She relieves herself of the stresses induced by working.

This is an extreme question to highlight some concrete differences, but can a man breastfeed his child?

I just don't understand how don't see "Men are expendable" (which necessarily means "men are expendable to women" since we are talking about male-female relationships) and "women should stay home, make babies, and raise children" as negative.

It's negative to you because you don't consider the reality of things. We SHOULD live in a world with peace. We SHOULD be kind to one another. We SHOULD treat each other with respect. But that is not how the world works. That is a very idealistic view of the world. These statements are negative to you because they betray your ideals.

We can't live with a blindfold over eyes and just expect each other to be proper.

How about... a man and woman get married and don't have children? How about... a man and a woman get married, adopt a baby, and the man stays home to raise it because the woman has a much more lucrative career?

All your options are plausible. They can happen. They probably do happen. But a man in the situation of staying at home to raise a child while his wife works, runs the risk of being divorced. Look, I know that you envision the "equality" in the world that we should strive for, but you simply undo thousands of years of evolution. You're pushing women to work and to accept these conditions on the basis of "equality".

If a woman wishes to work and enjoys the fact that her husband stays at home taking care of the children, no one is opposing that. The problem is that there is research available that indicates that women are generally unhappy with their husbands who do not work and stay at home.

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Invalidity2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Invalidity1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

The constant posts about how women lack honour, how they lack loyalty etc. etc. Rarely are there any positive qualities of women mentioned on TRP. You can deny it all you want, but the average post on women on TRP is about the negatives and the positives are rarely (if ever) discussed.

While that is true, what discussion is there in bringing up positive traits? There is nothing that we need to understand about positive traits. I can tell you that women on average, tend to be more caring and softer than men. There is nothing I need to understand about that.

What TRP members do need to understand is that women love conditionally. They love their children unconditionally, but a woman's love for a man is conditional. This is not negative. This is simply understanding that a man is required to maintain a high level of attractiveness to receive a woman's love. There is a lot of discussion in that.

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]Invalidity0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Greyletter4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]StabbyPantsPillhead1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Invalidity-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]pillburtRed Pill Mana mana0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]pillburtRed Pill Mana mana0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Invalidity0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Invalidity0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Straight to the ad hominem of insecurity and intimidation.

It's not about intimidation. Many men are willing to interact with promiscuous women. There is no intimidation about that. But many men will limit their interactions knowing that a woman has had a lot of sexual partners because it is indication of poor impulse control.

The same can be said for men: a man who has had a lot of sexual partners is suspect for poor impulse control. Poor impulse control is often not good for a relationship wherein decision making is critical.

If you are comfortable knowing that your partner may make risky decisions (ie. having extramarital affairs), then there is nothing wrong for one person to pursue another person with a storied sexual history. But that isn't true for most males.

If we had to simplify it, it's a preference. You're choosing to attack people based on their preference. If I said I preferred apples over oranges, would you shame me for not liking oranges as much? It is the same exact deal with promiscuous women: most men like promiscuous women, but would strictly prefer to be in a relationship with a woman who is considered a "prude" by modern day standards (does not have a lot of sex).

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]CallMeMrBadGuy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

One thing a lot of people don't understand about TRP--members of and criticizers of--is that TRP is a toolbox. You take what you need/want out of it. If you're trying to use TRP to better your LTRs, then how does/why would game apply to you? Similarly, if you're looking to spin plates/have ONSs, I don't think the posts on the sub about the unicorn hunter checklist will apply to you.

Plenty of people do unsavory things to get ahead and it works. I'll see if I can't take away some positives from TRP though.

You can correct me if I'm wrong, since you identify as blue pill, but I think this is what gets people riled up a lot.

When people do whatever they can to get ahead in the workplace, sure it pisses some people off, but I've seen it cause other people to respect/admire the person who gets ahead. When men apply similar attitudes towards women (i.e. the dark triad traits), it's met with hostility.

Men are just trying to get ahead in their love lives, similar to how they would get ahead in their professional lives.

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

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Greyletter1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

are women capable of being rational?

I believe that they are capable of it, but not as often and not to the same degree as men. Men have about 6.5 times as much gray matter in their brains, which is major component of the nervous system that allows for logical, rational thinking. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

If you're capable of being capable of honor, you're capable of honor.

I had to think about this to make sure the wording didn't confuse me. Not necessarily. Capable of being capable does not necessarily mean you are capable.

I'd say both genders are capable of honor, but men are more easily capable of honor, probably because of them being able to rationally and logically think with ease. I've heard stories where a man will provide for his wife--he'll pay the rent/mortgage, be the primary breadwinner, and occasionally by flowers, but she'll feel unloved/neglected because he hasn't gotten her any gifts. This isn't the best example of honor, but if she really was honorable she wouldn't be complaining.

Manipulation is viewed as a crime from women by a lot of men because society indoctrinates this belief in us that women are not going to be manipulative. We are raised being taught that women are not going to make false rape allegations. We are taught that women won't fake pregnancies and try to reel us in for child support. We are taught that women won't perform oral sex on a man, keep his condom full of semen, inject it into her vagina, sue him for child support, and win in court. Or, perhaps more accurately, we aren't taught that there are women who those things.

So, the reason why manipulation is viewed as a crime from women is (in short) because society has taught men that they won't be manipulative, and many men on TRP and MensRights are being forced to accept that women can be evil and manipulative just as men can be.

The reason manipulation is viewed as an imperative for men--and not all men have this view--is because we need some sort of tool to distinguish between higher quality women and lower quality women. We need to be able to test whether X girl is LTR material, or ONS material. We need manipulation because the legal system is against us in the west, and our lives will be royally screwed if we make one misstep.

I'm not saying that this is how it should be. In an ideal world, no one would manipulate. But this is how it is.

Edited to source my facts

[–]polyhooly1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Men have about 6.5 times as much gray matter in their brains, which is major component of the nervous system that allows for logical, rational thinking.

The brain is much more complex than this part does this, and this part does that. Some new studies have shown that diseases of white matter can impair planning, problem solving, organizing, and visual-spatial abilities. Source. So it can be concluded that white matter plays a role in rational and logical thinking.

And even with that being said, how do you feel that the amount of gray and white matter in the brain is entirely plastic? Performing certain tasks can signifcantly increase the amount of gray or white matter in the brain. Source. All men do not have 6.5 times the amount of gray matter, it's an average.

Manipulation is viewed as a crime from women by a lot of men because society indoctrinates this belief in us that women are not going to be manipulative.

Ahh yes, the old gossiping, rumor spreading, passive aggressive male stereotype... Sorry, but you have it backwards. Women are typically accused of being the manipulative ones whereas men as being more up front and aggressive.

Most people realize that there are people out there, regardless of gender, who are willing to screw you over and take advantage of you. I'm sorry you thought women were perfect, infallible angels. That's not societies fault. And because you're still reeling from the shock the women are not perfect, your confirmation bias is amplifying examples of women behaving badly, and allowing you to excuse, or entirely ignore when men are less than honorable. This is why you are so willing to believe dumb shit like this:

We are taught that women won't perform oral sex on a man, keep his condom full of semen, inject it into her vagina, sue him for child support, and win in court.

I suppose you are referring to this he said, she said story that has been rejected by the courts because the clinic was able to provide proof of his consent: documents he signed and blood tests he submitted. Dude was just trying to weasel his way out of paying child support. Honorable men, though.

The reason manipulation is viewed as an imperative for men--and not all men have this view--is because we need some sort of tool to distinguish between higher quality women and lower quality women. We need to be able to test whether X girl is LTR material, or ONS material.

So shit tests?

So let me get this straight: When men do manipulative things to women, it is for legitimate and understandable reasons. When women do manipulative things to men, it is because women are dishonorable, disloyal, blah blah blah due to their brain composition.... Right

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

All men do not have 6.5 times the amount of gray matter, it's an average.

Of course. I didn't mean to say each individual man has 6.5 times the gray matter as women do.

Women are typically accused of being the manipulative ones whereas men as being more up front and aggressive.

I don't know where you're getting this from, but this is certainly not what I grew up with.

I'm sorry you thought women were perfect, infallible angels.

You can drop the condescending tone, I'm being respectful in all of my dialogue. That said, it wasn't that I believed women to be perfect. It's that growing up, the notion I got from media, my parents, teachers at school, and my peers it that women were generally nicer and not as mean as men were going to be. And now that I've swallowed TRP and learned the truth I'm no longer mad about it.

That's not societies fault.

I agree. It's my fault for believing its lies without questioning them for myself.

And because you're still reeling from the shock the women are not perfect,

I'm not reeling from the shock, I got over this a while ago. Again, you can drop the condescending tone. I'm being respectful to you and I'd appreciate the same.

Regarding the story I mentioned, the man stated that he never gave his consent. He said in the article you linked that

his signature was forged and "doesn't match."

and I am inclined to believe him, because most men I know don't anticipate a pregnancy from oral sex. They should now however, after reading stories like that.

But fine, since we can't agree over this story, what about this one? Is the man trying to weasel out of child support there as well? I don't think he is.

So shit tests?

No. Our tests are manipulating women into them telling us their true partner count, or finding out how loyal they really are.

When a woman shit tests a man she is trying to see how much she can get away with. That is the fundamental reason behind it. It is to test how stable a guy's frame is and how much BS he'll put up. The more shit tests a guy fails, the less respect a woman has for him.

When a guy is testing a girl, he's not trying to see how much he can get away with. He's trying to see whether she's LTR material or not. Guy's don't typically test girls for ONS or for other casual hook-ups because there isn't really a point. If it's casual, then the guy is in it just for one night of sex or maybe a few nights. He isn't going to care to really get to know her that much.

We need to be able to test whether X girl is LTR material, or ONS material.

To clarify this point, typically, a guy will test a girl to see if she's LTR material. If she fails, she's deemed ONS material. Guys going into casual relationships to begin with won't be testing. Also, I understand the differences, but I'm using ONS and casual relationships interchangeably.

When men do manipulative things to women, it is for legitimate and understandable reasons.

It isn't legitimate. There is no 'legitimate' reason for any one person to manipulate any other person (in my view). But it sure as hell is understandable. The courts and the law are so much in women's favor that if a man wants an LTR he has to protect himself in any way possible. And I fully support and endorse using manipulation to your advantage to better your chances of not getting screwed over by the system.

When women do manipulative things to men, it is because women are dishonorable, disloyal, blah blah blah due to their brain composition....

It's either this, or it could be a result of their hypergamy. They could simply be trying to see how much they can get away with, and if their partner doesn't have a strong enough frame, that will lead the woman to believe that he isn't a good enough mate, causing her to continually disrespect him and then later trade up.

But I don't see why this point is so hard for you to believe. Have you not browsed r/relationships, r/confessions, and other subs? I've seen plenty of stories where the women ARE dishonorable, disloyal, and flat out manipulative for their gain. Do you need links?

[–]polyhooly-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

I agree. It's my fault for believing its lies without questioning them for myself.

This is such a passive aggressive shirking of blame. You're essentially saying "It's not my fault I believed your lies!" You still see yourself a victim of lies, and the only blame you feel you have is that you didn't question things sooner.

I'm not reeling from the shock, I got over this a while ago. Again, you can drop the condescending tone. I'm being respectful to you and I'd appreciate the same.

I see things differently.

and I am inclined to believe him, because most men I know don't anticipate a pregnancy from oral sex. They should now however, after reading stories like that.

Of course you do, because you're so eager to latch onto a story that confirms your bias. Reread the story. He said she forged his signature. The clinic came back with proof he even provided blood tests.

But fine, since we can't agree over this story, what about this one? Is the man trying to weasel out of child support there as well? I don't think he is.

What's your point with even linking that. Do you think my position is that women can never, ever do anything bad to a man?

It isn't legitimate. There is no 'legitimate' reason for any one person to manipulate any other person (in my view). But it sure as hell is understandable.

Saying it's understandable is legitimizing it. And this is a perfect example of TRP's hamstering: you're rationalizing bad behavior and treating others poorly because you believe it is justified (a great example of solipsism, too), whereas when the out group (women) do the same to men it is simply because they're shitty. It's a prime example of the fundamental attribution error. Ever hear the term one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter? You believe men's actions are reasonable and noble. Women's are anything but. Give me a break and gain some perspective. You see all of these situations through your bias, your visceral contempt for women. Its nothing but irrational, emotive thinking.

No. Our tests are manipulating women into them telling us their true partner count, or finding out how loyal they really are. When a woman shit tests a man she is trying to see how much she can get away with. That is the fundamental reason behind it. It is to test how stable a guy's frame is and how much BS he'll put up. The more shit tests a guy fails, the less respect a woman has for him.

Those are the exact same behaviors, you're just framing one as positive and innocuous.

Let's establish two things TRP believes: Slutty women are not worthy of respect, and women who feel a man is not alpha enough will eventually leave him for a man that is. If a man is judging if a woman is LTR material or ONS material, he is judging how he can treat her. Does he treat her with respect, or as a slut (who, again, deserves no respect according to TRP)? Another way you can describe that is judging what treatment and behaviors you can and can't get away with with her. Now let's talk about women: If a woman feels a man is not worthy of respect and a long term relationship, according to your very own notion of hypergamy, she'll leave him. So men judge if women are LTR relationship material or fuck buddies based on how they respect them. Women judge if men are LTR material or fodder based on if they respect them enough. That is your ideology.

But I don't see why this point is so hard for you to believe. Have you not browsed r/relationships, r/confessions, and other subs? I've seen plenty of stories where the women ARE dishonorable, disloyal, and flat out manipulative for their gain. Do you need links?

What point is hard for me to see? My position is NOT that women don't so shitty things to men, so knock it off on the "but look, here's a ink of a woman doing something shitty!". I'm just calling you out on your ridiculous belief that, again, men do shitty things to women for legitimate, understandable reasons, and women do them because that's just female nature. You have mistaken your ridiculous, fallacious position for mine. And again, of course your bias is allowing you to amplify stories of women behaving badly. This website is predominantly male. of course the stories are going to be about their experiences more than those of women (not that women sharing their stories would elicit the same empathy and anger from you as they do men, as you have nothing but contempt for women). Do you really think this is an accurate measure of reality, that women are clearly more shitty than men because there are more stories of their bad behavior on Reddit's relationship subs, from only one side of the story (the man's)? We could go back and forth all day supplying stories of men and women doing terrible things to each other. The difference between you and I is that I realize being abusive and taking advantage of your partner is a genderless behavior. You believe it is strictly a female on male phenomenon, again, because you are still reeling, you are still shocked that women can do bad things, too. Another difference between you and I is that you, someone who admits he has never had any sort of relationship, including friendships, with women, believes that relationships are inherently adversarial, that the baseline for most relationships is trying to pull one over on each other, all because you immerse yourself in the worst of the worst.

[–]Greyletter-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]AerobusThe Red Pill is Truth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

1st & 2nd citations: Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Yes it does. That's exactly what it means.

No it does not. Capable of being capable implies that you are also capable of not being capable. Being capable of something does not necessarily mean you will do it, you will excel at it, or that is something you are inclined to do. Therefore, capable of being capable means that you possess the ability to be capable, but you do possess only the ability the capable. You also possess the ability to be incapable.

If you want to stop debating, that's your prerogative. But ending it with an immature, half-hearted retort because you dislike what I write doesn't increase your credibility over mine.

Edit: Also,

Your next paragraph was too frustrating... I can't even deal with it.

This is exactly what I mean when I say that women, and even some men, are not able to remain logical and free of emotions like most men are.

[–]Greyletter-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]ILU250 shades of purple0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]robestaRed Pill Man4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Brassdragon14-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Brassdragon141 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

The problem with the latching theory is that generally, if a man has seen you move from man to man a few times because you've seen someone better, they won't accept you when you come to them begging for help. At some point the manipulation harms the victim, while the woman still gets left out on her own because she hasn't been tactful.

You're looking at the behavior through a modern day lens. Think about it like this. Cavewoman Jane loves Caveman Grok. Grok protects her from harm and gets her meat. Grok gets killed by Grank. Jane looks at Grank and gets puppy dog eyes and actually has feelings for him. It's a natural reaction for her to survive.

I don't buy the whole men not wanting "used up" women meme at TRP. To me, that is a completely logical and cultural reaction, not an instinctual reaction.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Brassdragon144 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In either of those scenarios, you're left with such a depleted pool of genes to select from that, regardless of the sex being more proliferate, both will die out eventually or suffer from damaging genetic mutations as a result of in breeding.

As a side note, women are not inherently more valuable - unless you claim value as having the ability to give birth. If you count value as being able to produce, however, men are, on average, predisposed towards higher levels of strength, agility, and success in the maths and sciences. All of these are valuable and practical skills, meaning men can produce more, build more, and by that definition be more valuable.

Eggs may be a limited commodity, but don't mistake that for expense - a woman has enough to lose one every month and waste it from the time she has her first menstrual cycle onwards. She may be born with a certain number, but that number is not small.

[–]squishles-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ayjayz1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fillmewithyourpoisonPurple Laydee0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]tryin2figureitoutRP male since before it was cool-4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tryin2figureitoutRP male since before it was cool-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Typically. See sources posted above for irrational at least. For naturally manipulative, you have to understand the Red Pill concept of power-talk and shit-tests. You just dispassionately look at how women make use of different factors to influence other factors, and you get a pretty manipulative view of women.

For honour, yes, I also think this. Women possess a more selfish honour. She will not die for a cause, nor remain loyal to it. She expects sacrifice for causes(including her own provision) other than her child(and even it for the bad ones) from others. Things are rationalized when they don't suit are narrative. It gets sticky fast.

Men do all of this too, but they lack equal opportunity to be manipulative(most males are not employing any interpersonal advantage like gatekeeper of sex card).

Male and female communication is provably linguistically different(read up on the concept of genderlect). Male communication is far more direct, and honest. Males are not as socially aware nor as likely to gossip, they take interest in ideas and doing things in an effort to socially compete(science, tech, etc interest groups and leadership, all initiatives for anything big ever, like businesses or inventions are usually male) in what women value; social status, wealth, etc. Women are extraordinarily sexually and socially aware(fashion, gossip, celebrity, are nearly all women markets) and compete for what men value; attractiveness, youth, image, etc.

Anyway, it goes on and on. Women are better survivors though. They're usually ones to resolve conflicts and ones to nurture others. They incentivize civilization.

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]DreamtrainNeither0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]fillmewithyourpoisonPurple Laydee5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

im open to a civil discourse friend.

even if they did view them as inferior (i dont agree that they are/do) how would this disprove any trp theory on attracting women? how is this not just being upset at the tone?

I'm arguing that the view TRP has of women is one of viewing women as inferior.

and your argument was that we think they are inferior because they're sometimes described as:

incapable of honor, naturally manipulative and conniving

do you agree that a large number of trp subscribers want to have some of those traits (the dark triad), and see them as superior?

to the other traits:

immature

i dont think theres a way to prove immaturity, so its pointless arguing over it since it is just opinion. and besides it wouldn't disprove any trp theory on attracting women.

irrational

this is a very controversial area. the average of both sexes is the same i believe i've read, and then i've also read that there are more men at the extreme of high intelligence and the extreme of low intelligence. im studying maths at the moment, there are definitely more men who are extremely good at maths from my personal experience.

[–]nope_nic_tesla0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

Math has been taught not as the language it is, but as a series of memorization until VERY recently. If you want to brag about memorizing without comprehensive understanding of the language of mathematics, that's not much of a bragging right (it's very similar to memorizing key phrases like "where is the bathroom" in a foreign language and spouting them out when you would like to cause an end result of peeing in a civilized fashion. As opposed to being able to use that language to write an essay on the left hemisphere and its role in motor skills, or a poem with multiple layers of meaning). But enjoy that while you can, as math training is being revolutionized to do the field justice.

Please define honor. That word is silly and needs definition to have any contextual meaning.

Immaturity is measurable. Again, there is a lack of definition going on, though at least the word "immature" has meaning in some contexts by itself, once you identify the context. Failing to identify the context doesn't mean it is an opinion.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

It's not a negative view of it's teaching, I'm literally talking about the standard curriculum. There's a good possibility you ARE being taught via the revised approach.

Why do you call it "maths"? What country are you in? (somewhere in the UK?)

Of course I've studied mathematics. It's impossible not to unless if you have no education, it's taught continuously throughout formal schooling.

Pretending you care, here's me tooting my own horn: I studied AP math from 5th grade on to senior year of HS, tested out of general ed math for college (ie, I had no math requirements because I already knew it), and then went into statistics, where I was invited to be a TA at my college after my first semester (which I did for a year). So yes, I have a good background in mathematics. I also have friends who are teachers whom are telling me about this movement in math education, which is wonderful and awesome. I am planning on taking courses in the new approach to math for no reason, except that I want to master it more fully and have a more deeply satisfying comprehension of it. I like math. A lot.

EDIT:

It's also not semantics, it's rhetoric. Rhetoric is a component of debating. Debating is the third word in the name of this subreddit. I realized when I first posted here a week or so ago, that pretty much nobody has a clue what a real debate is, but that's fine.

Just for the hell of it, let me inform you that you're not doing it (debating! Real debating!). This is a place where people have somewhat flimsy opinions and fly them around like the flags on a dinky pirate ship. A real debate would be alike to a cannonball ripping through your ridiculous sails.

Which is fine. I accept this whole thing is a mess.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

even if they did view them as inferior (i dont agree that they are/do) how would this disprove any trp theory on attracting women? how is this not just being upset at the tone?

I was never trying to disprove trp theory, I don't know where you got that from, I was asserting that trp views women as inferior. Which you quoted immediately after this, so I don't understand how you didn't get that.

and your argument was that we think they are inferior because they're sometimes described as:

incapable of honor, naturally manipulative and conniving

do you agree that a large number of trp subscribers want to have some of those traits (the dark triad), and see them as superior?

No, I think they see them as okay because 'sexual strategy is amoral' and 'women did it first'

to the other traits:

immature

i dont think theres a way to prove immaturity, so its pointless arguing over it since it is just opinion. and besides it wouldn't disprove any trp theory on attracting women.

I think you're really bad at this and you're attempts to avoid taking about this make no sense.. it doesn't matter if it's an opinion, it's still trp viewing women as inherently inferior. And again, it's not an attempt to prove trp theory wrong.

irrational

this is a very controversial area. the average of both sexes is the same i believe i've read, and then i've also read that there are more men at the extreme of high intelligence and the extreme of low intelligence. im studying maths at the moment, there are definitely more men who are extremely good at maths from my personal experience.

But the sidebar says women are naturally irrational unlike men. Your personal views are not relevant.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]tryin2figureitoutRP male since before it was cool-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]an_absolute_roseRed Pill Boy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Like separate bathrooms. Oh the injustice! I didn't think this was really a thing, shiiit. http://www.xojane.com/issues/crappy-system-why-separating-men-s-and-women-s-bathrooms-illogical http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/12/26/gender_neutral_bathrooms_all_bathrooms_should_be_open_to_all_users.html

Do you want to know why we don't talk about the negative traits of men on TRP as much as we do women? It's because TRP is a sub for sexual strategy. Most of us don't want to fuck men, it's not aimed towards finding a good man. It's aimed towards making yourself a more desirable man. TRP encourages the adoption of the good traits that we associate with men. Not all men have those traits, and men have plenty of traits that women don't usually have. We don't talk often about these because the sub is aimed at getting laid with women. We don't often talk about the good traits of women because the newbies need to take women off the pedestal, overcorrecting is much better than under in this case.

[–]nope_nic_tesla-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't think women are inferior to men. However the criticism you're raising seems a bit forced.

The most hardcore (delusional?) redpillers may believe that men are superior to women. They probably use the 'men invented civilization' line of reasoning we have all seen over here from time to time. This doesn't mean developing a strategy to deal with them is inconsistent with the belief that they are inferior.

For one, the kind of person who thinks women are inferior, tends to also think that women are naturally much better at manipulation than men are. So even if a person believes that men are better in x,y, and z ways, making them the superior gender, they can simultaneously think that women are dangerous for their ability to manipulate men.

Take a bear for example. We think humans are 'superior' to bears. If a bear harms a human we kill it, even if the human was in the wrong. We lock bears in zoos. Bears cannot vote or participate in human society. They have no rights beyond the right not to be tortured for no reason. That doesn't mean a bear isn't dangerous. Because even though humans are smarter than bears, have greater depth of emotion, are more artistic, have better memory, can see better etc. etc., bears are stronger, faster, and tougher than us. We can be superior to bears in a 1000 ways, but they only need to be better than us in a few to be a threat. And the reality is we have strategies to deal with bears.

There's a lot to criticize in the "men are superior" position. But the best way of showing its internal inconsistency isn't to argue that 'superior beings' don't need communities and strategies to deal with 'inferior beings.' Humanity's attitude towards and relationship with nature shows otherwise.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Yeah because you can't just outright say you hate [group of people] and actually gain supporters. You need to settle the noobies into your beliefs slowly. Even Nazis had justifications for why they hated the Jews and never outright said the words "Jews are inferior." They made up science to give that impression and let the propaganda speak for them, like TRP does.

You have to make up your justifications and your reasoning to get new followers on-side then you must have the ability to slowly let them in, otherwise they simply view you as weird extremists and will never join you. So screaming "women are inferior to men" everywhere would definitely scare potential new red pillers off, while saying "women are irrational because [insert anecdote here] therefore [insert red pill theory here]" would have them nodding, because like horoscopes, everyone in the target audience can relate to that kind of shit.

For example justifying the hamstering theory by talking about bad ex-girlfriends. Almost every guy reading TRP will be able to relate to that and will slowly become comfortable with TRP as a result. But if all they saw was people saying women are inferior they'd run away from that shit quicker than you can say "Matrix."

[–]aintdonegotno8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]aintdonegotno9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]worktimeterpinRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

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

[–][deleted] 8 points8 points8 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BorMatoRed Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]pillburtRed Pill Mana mana0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points10 points10 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]17b29a4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]17b29a2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZackcidCrimson Pill-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZackcidCrimson Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZackcidCrimson Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]ZackcidCrimson Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]17b29a3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]squishles1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]17b29a3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]17b29a3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mcdehuevoRed Pill Man3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

This question is an obvious straw man, so I'll respond in two ways: first to the straw man itself, then to the intellectually honest version of the question.

Response to straw man

The meaning of the word "inferior" is used in a broad, generic sense, and is therefore not well-defined in this question, so I will base my response on some points that I think are common stereotypes, in equally generic form, of what Red Pillers believe:

Women are "less intelligent" and "more emotional" than men
Women are only capable of raising children and doing domestic chores
Women should be obedient servants to men in all things, including sex

In this framework, the response is simple: none of this negates the possibility of women using lies, distortion, manipulation, and social relationships to get what they want from men. In fact, in a social context where "visible power" is in a state of complete imbalance in favor of one group, the other group is more likely to use underhanded tactics against its oppressors to gain some semblance of fair treatment. If TRP were as it's presented by its detractors, then all it would be saying is that we've gotten to a point where the slaves have successfully rebelled against the masters, something that has happened so many times throughout history that I don't need to cite specific examples. So in its straw man form, the question is moot.

Response to intellectually honest question

Let's say this question could be rephrased to "Given the Red Pill belief that men are genetically inclined to be leaders - including both physical and psychological traits which support this status - and women are genetically inclined to be followers, how is it possible that we have reached a state in which it has become necessary for the leaders to develop and implement strategies designed to overcome the power of the followers?"

In short, most of the answers to this version of the question are in the thread you linked. The only thing I'll add is a point I've noticed is at or near the root of most misconceptions or misrepresentations of TRP: the idea of "universal" vs "default".

Many criticisms of TRP seem to assume that its validity hinges on its principals applying to every individual male and female. Instead, it should be viewed in terms of a bell curve; in essence, replace the words "women" and "men" in almost any statement with "generic model of femininity" or "generic model of masculinity", with the underlying assumption that a majority of women will fit that model within a reasonable range of variance, and vice versa. These principles are meant to offer men a starting point when interacting with women, rather than having to mentally reinvent the wheel every time. Anyone espousing them assumes that an intelligent human will, unlike, say, a machine, recognize that he will need to adjust to the specific traits of the individual with whom he is interacting.

All that being said, I have a counter-question: many in TRP believe the only reason feminists and BP men direct so much vitriol at TRP is that they regard it as a threat to the modern female-centric culture, a virus which must be isolated and destroyed. This is coming from the perspective of those of us who know, as individuals, that the caricatures don't apply to us; we are just trying to get our needs met in a social environment that has become hostile to the achievement of that goal. So the question is: if we assume that this perception (BPers are responding in knee-jerk fashion to a threat by attacking it without understanding it) is wrong, and that the caricatures and stereotypes (RPers are closet misogynists working to re-enslave the entire female gender) are also wrong, then what's (c), where (c) is the true, deep-down reason TRP is so hated?

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

This question is an obvious straw man, so I'll respond in two ways: first to the straw man itself, then to the intellectually honest version of the question.

You're thinking of the philosophical principle of charity. If your opponent's argument is poor, explain why, but then, if you can solve the problem you introduced and improve that argument yourself, do that too. This allows us to get to the best answer faster, rather than arguing to try to "win" by proving your opponent stupid.

Good plan. Let's see how you implement it.

You believe that TRP has the following biases, in broad strokes:

Women are "less intelligent" and "more emotional" than men

Women are only capable of raising children and doing domestic chores

Women should be obedient servants to men in all things, including sex

They're broad terms, but we can still assess them. Do you think those are wrong or right? Do you think they reflect a general impression of inferiority? By the way, the first one has been scientifically proven to be the opposite of the truth.

In this framework, the response is simple: none of this negates the possibility of women using lies, distortion, manipulation, and social relationships to get what they want from men. In fact, in a social context where "visible power" is in a state of complete imbalance in favor of one group, the other group is more likely to use underhanded tactics against its oppressors to gain some semblance of fair treatment. If TRP were as it's presented by its detractors, then all it would be saying is that we've gotten to a point where the slaves have successfully rebelled against the masters, something that has happened so many times throughout history that I don't need to cite specific examples. So in its straw man form, the question is moot.

Ah, so what you're trying to say is, essentially, "women are inferior, but they play fucking dirty so we need to play dirty back." Is that about right?

Let's say this question could be rephrased to "Given the Red Pill belief that men are genetically inclined to be leaders - including both physical and psychological traits which support this status - and women are genetically inclined to be followers, how is it possible that we have reached a state in which it has become necessary for the leaders to develop and implement strategies designed to overcome the power of the followers?"

The first part of your question -- the given -- is not a charitable argument, it's a straw man. The advantages TRP thinks men have over women are not nearly so limited. The majority of TRP believes, and refuses to admit it believes, that men are superior to women in every way that is worth talking about. The only qualities anybody on TRP admits that women have over men are that they are more pleasant to look at, better at raising kids (the way the man tells them to raise the kids), and perhaps in some abstract emotional way that doesn't mean anything. Meanwhile, men are intellectually, morally, and practically superior. They are stronger. They are worth more in every discernable way. They are capable of being rational and honorable, unlike women. They aren't mechanically wired to lie and cheat. Every way you could possibly say men are better without saying men are better, you do. So the best question still stands as, "if men are so much better than women in every fucking way, why are women winning?

Many criticisms of TRP seem to assume that its validity hinges on its principals applying to every individual male and female. Instead, it should be viewed in terms of a bell curve; in essence, replace the words "women" and "men" in almost any statement with "generic model of femininity" or "generic model of masculinity", with the underlying assumption that a majority of women will fit that model within a reasonable range of variance, and vice versa.

The criticisms you refer to are mostly criticisms of TRP's tendency to refuse to acknowledge any such variance. A lot of posters on TRP seem to think that all men are one way and women are another. I almost never see words like "generally" or "on average" or "usually" on TRP -- and somewhat often see words like "all" and "only." What's more, when you don't qualify a statement like "Women should be obedient servants to men in all things, including sex," with a word from the former set, it sounds a lot like it applies to all women, and not just most. Perhaps the fact that this is constantly repeated contributes to the echo chamber and reinforces the confidence TRP members have in their mistaken beliefs. I have a hard time believing that this is an unintentional pattern: the TRP sidebar actually tries to conflate the words all and most. I believe they do this because they think that confusing people is justified as a way of silencing the "concern trolls" (dissenters) and helping people see the "truth" and "swallow the red pill" (a fallacious theory you can only believe if you're stuck in an environment that bans dissent and tries to deceive you in ways such as this).

the only reason feminists and BP men direct so much vitriol at TRP

You're already wrong. There is not only one reason -- the reasons are far and wide. You hate on women, ban dissent, invoke dubious pseudoscience, tell men to be arrogant assholes to get what they want, shirk all moral responsibility for your actions, actively attack some unbelievable strawman of feminism, and advocate rape, and go about it all in a way that feels vaguely cultish just to name a few of our problems. But let's see what you think the only problem is.

they regard it as a threat to the modern female-centric culture, a virus which must be isolated and destroyed.

Jesus Christ, no. We hate you because you're sexist enough to think that our culture is a female-centric culture. We think it takes immense, idiotic, blind bias to think something so asinine. Not that it's true, and we need to maintain it by shutting you up. Note that TRPers are not banned from non-TRP communities, they're just ridiculed and ignored -- you know, like Reddit was supposed to work. TRP views all dissent as a threat because it might cause a person to be non-RP, but the only ways non-TRPers view TRP as a threat are insofar as it encourages such dangerous behaviors and attitudes as described above.

that the caricatures don't apply to us

Not all of them, to all of you, perfectly. But TRP as a community tries to encourage the qualities of this character, and your members have a markedly higher tendency to reflect some of those qualities, and if you reflect none of those qualities then you probably wouldn't associate with TRP.

RPers are closet misogynists working to re-enslave the entire female gender

It isn't really closeted. See:

Women are "less intelligent" and "more emotional" than men

Women are only capable of raising children and doing domestic chores

Women should be obedient servants to men in all things, including sex

[–]mcdehuevoRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The straw man portion of my response sailed right over your head. Those bullets were my summation of what people who actively seek to misrepresent TRP say that TRP believes. The clues to that were where I said:

"some points that I think are common stereotypes, in equally generic form, of what Red Pillers believe"
"If TRP were as it's presented by its detractors"

Therefore, the portion of your comment that addresses my straw man response, as well as where you use my bullets to prove how TRP's sexism is not closeted, are just taking up screen space without adding value to the discussion.

So let's look at just where you're responding to the second part of my comment, in which I was attempting to give my opponent the benefit of the doubt and answer the question he would have asked had he been giving me the same courtesy:

You're already wrong. There is not only one reason

Well, we're already headed down the "sailing over your head" path again...

advocate rape

Bingo!

Why are you even bothering with PPD? Your mind is made up. Don't waste my time.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, I did indeed misread the straw man portion, my apologies. To go back over those three perception of TRP:

Women are "less intelligent" and "more emotional" than men

I don't think TRP so often says women are less intelligent as it says... "Weeelllll, there are different types of intelligence, and men have [insert all the good ones here], and women have [insert all the bad ones and some that don't matter here]." They might say women are less suited for intellectual pursuits, shouldn't work because they aren't as good at it as men. Women are less effective as leaders, but perhaps for reasons other than their intelligence. Women are less suited to rational thought (see this comment). They go through a lot of pomp and circumstance to not explicitly state that they think women are less intelligent (and inferior) while strongly, strongly implying it. Not because they care about optics, but because they're afraid to admit what they think to themselves.

Women are only capable of raising children and doing domestic chores

I don't actually think you think women are only capable of that stuff, but I think that (a) TRP has a large bias that women are supposed to fill those roles, and that if they prefer to work, there's something off. They also want women to fill those roles more often, although I do know a decent number of TRPers who would find such a person boring as I would. I think the main problem, though, is the conflation of "all" and "most" I discussed later in my previous comment. TRP will consistently blur the line between whether this is a preference or tendency, or a steadfast rule. If pressed, they will say it's the former, but when not pressed, they will use language to imply the latter.

Women should be obedient servants to men in all things, including sex

Not so much slaves as servants -- they should be obedient, and do what men tell them to do, right? They still have the choice, but they should always choose the one way, right?

So let's look at just where you're responding to the second part of my comment, in which I was attempting to give my opponent the benefit of the doubt and answer the question he would have asked had he been giving me the same courtesy:

skips almost the entire argument

Cool, nice to see you not even attempt to reply to what I said and claim you're trying to give me the benefit of the doubt.

Well, we're already headed down the "sailing over your head" path again...

I realize that you don't think this is the only reason, but you've very conveniently decided to speak in circles, and never really say what you thought, but only what you thought other people thought, and what other people thought about what other people thought. I'm responding to what you say TRP is, not to you: if TRP thinks "the only reason" we hate them is x, they're wrong as soon as they say "only."

Bingo!

Bingo what? Would you like to argue whether or not TRP advocates rape? TRP obviously likes to say it doesn't, but I'm more than willing to support my statement that it does. But I am not wrong by virtue of having accused your subreddit of something that sounds awful.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't fear competition on an even playing field, if that is in fact what you are asking.

My wife is a professional who makes very good money, but I call the shots in our family.

I'm the one who game planned and executed the purchase of our home and acquisition of our rental properties. I'm the one who manages relationships with the different people we hire to care for those properties.

My wife wants to branch out and either buy the practice she's at or hang her own shingle. There is a plan in place for that at present - a plan I devised and am working on.

I have things moving right now, getting a business of my own going. Shit is happening. We are making money and are on an upward trend.

When I met my wife, she had the sheepskin and the work experience, but she was beholden to her boss - who is a fair and decent man - but still a business man. She was underpaid, living in a run down house, living day to day with blinders on.

Since meeting me, she now lives in an executive home with decent rental income flowing, benefitting from our two professional salaries. We are about to make a move into an even larger world within 12 months.

Its not that women aren't capable, because there are plenty of examples of high achieving women in the world. Its that on average men are higher achievers. Women do commonly look to men for leadership where it counts most - in their personal lives.

We men take care of fucking business and women love us for it.

This is why women don't defer status. They have an expectation that their partner will have a higher level of achievement than they do. Hypergamy is the manifestation of this expectation incorporated into sexual strategy. Its how women are. It doesn't make them bad people, it makes them survivors using what means they have at their disposal.

You'll see on TRP that we favor equal opportunity. I believe definitely that there are brilliant capable women out there who can be very successful, and those women shouldn't be stifled.

However, what I don't support is propping up some dumb fuctard just because she's got a pussy between her legs.

By what we see in the laws in western society, women would not fare well in pure competition, that is why they need state intervention. I think that is fair to say. The question is how much intervention is too much or too little.

I think at present most at TRP would agree its too much.

The educational and family law systems are glaringly anti-male, for example.

Also the social narratives have changed. All this anti-shaming rhetoric has removed the shame from negative female behavior. Some bad shit has been normalized.

So men do need some collective intelligence on how to deal with these things so they can keep taking care of business.

All the psuedo-intellectual conjecture about equality, aside... In the real world men live with a higher set of expectations. We have little to no safety net and fewer protections under the law. Feminist advocacy has increased in the last decade and that has led to a growing disparity in state defined gender rights. For example, men can be thrown out of their homes and institutions of higher learning as a result of a baseless accusations. Red Pill men are mindful of this.

We need a collective personal advocacy to navigate all the cultural and legal landmines set for us out there.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Its not that women aren't capable, because there are plenty of examples of high achieving women in the world. Its that on average men are higher achievers. Women do commonly look to men for leadership where it counts most - in their personal lives.

I'm pretty fine with everything up to here -- that you're talking about averages and common cases, that this setup happens to work for you...

We men take care of fucking business and women love us for it.

This is why women don't defer status. They have an expectation that their partner will have a higher level of achievement than they do. Hypergamy is the manifestation of this expectation incorporated into sexual strategy. Its how women are. It doesn't make them bad people, it makes them survivors using what means they have at their disposal.

Here's where you lost me. Maybe you still meant to use qualifiers like "most" and "generally" and "tend to," but you didn't, and I think this is a large part of the damage TRP deals: that it treats gender norms as facts, and applies them to everybody. I don't fit the norm you say applies to my gender, and I often get the impression that you think me inferior for that. I get the impression that you think women who don't fit their gender norm don't exist. Or, you know better on one level, but when you're not consciously thinking about it, you forget. And when you're faced with an exception to the norms, you often either think it negative, or are at least caught with surprise. Again, maybe this doesn't apply to you, but it's the impression I get from TRP often.

By what we see in the laws in western society, women would not fare well in pure competition, that is why they need state intervention. I think that is fair to say. The question is how much intervention is too much or too little.

Rather, the issue is: women don't fare well in competition, and this is largely due to biases we have. Correcting for these biases might be best for society in that it ensures the most qualified individual gets the job. State intervention is not always the correct remedy for these biases, but it is sometimes. See this article for a discussion on one such bias, which does not call for state intervention. The bias relates to confidence: how we view it as a positive in men, but not as much so in women, and how we view it as a positive even after it is shown statistically to be a fault. Perhaps that is related to what held your wife back for what time it did -- but I'm glad she got over it, and glad you could help insomuch as you did.

In other cases, the issue is that businesses mistreat women in certain ways. For example, businesses might refuse to offer maternity leave, because they can make more money by keeping their employees at work. But even to the extent this is based in real economic concerns, it is a pretty extreme policy, and is not really a sound way to run a society. Since families sometimes to have maternity and paternity leave more often than businesses are willing to supply, and since not every employee will have the foresight or power to negotiate maternity or paternity terms in their employment contracts, and especially since this issue is tied to keeping women down in that they are often made to quit altogether, it is a problem for which state intervention is, to some extent, appropriate.

The educational and family law systems are glaringly anti-male, for example.

I know of no such issue with the educational system. I've heard TRP arguments relating to the family law system, and, with the exception of child custody hearings, think the arguments I've heard are quite silly.

Also the social narratives have changed. All this anti-shaming rhetoric has removed the shame from negative female behavior. Some bad shit has been normalized.

To what negative behavior are you referring? are you talking about "slut shaming?" How would you say that women sleeping with men they are not married to, or enjoying sex, is negative -- if you would?

We have little to no safety net and fewer protections under the law.

Not really. We're equally protected by 14th amendment jurisprudence, and the legal protections afforded to women are usually targetted at things that have specifically to do with women, like maternity and prescription birth control... I'm not entirely sure where you want the law to protect men more than it protects women to "balance those out," if you think those effects should be "balanced out..."

For example, men can be thrown out of their homes and institutions of higher learning as a result of a baseless accusations.

But, likewise, women can be raped on camera, and, even with that videotape evidence, the men responsible allowed to get off scott-free. Rape cases are really fucking hard to get right, and really fucking sensitive, and sometimes society overreacts in one direction, but more often it overreacts in the other. I'm not saying there's not a problem, but it's really not so one-sided an issue as you say it is.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You know what I'm going to say about bias and the so-called confidence-gap.

It's complete bullshit.

There are two main types of bias that exist in the business world - the bias of profit and liability. Do you really think CEOs of multinational corporations pigeon hole women? Shit most of these big corporate HR departments are run by women. They hire women all over the world, they don't give a shit. What they care about is maximizing shareholder value. That is what is going to make them rich - and that's why they are in the game.

People seek employment and businesses hire based on needs that intersects value, market and rate of wage.

If there is an effect of bias on wage, then its not a result of a confidence-gap, it's because of a lowered sense of urgency on the part of women who know they can lean on spouses as the family breadwinners.

The issue of confidence is not a gendered one. People of all walks of life struggle to know exactly what their actual value is and how far they can leverage it. We all at one time or another have to overcome self doubt and learn how to develop and apply acumen. The onus is always on the individual to make the most of their given abilities.

As far as my wife is concerned, as soon as she stopped making it less about her emotions and more about the task at hand she started to experience better success and personal satisfaction at work. This is something any woman could do.

Funny thing is, once she developed this new perspective she starting frequently recognizing selfish, illogical behavior in women she had to deal with in the workplace.

She started to come home dumbfounded, talking about 50+ year old women she has to interact with on a daily basis who are basically tantrum throwing brats. She can't wrap her head around it now.

For example, businesses might refuse to offer maternity leave, because they can make more money by keeping their employees at work. But even to the extent this is based in real economic concerns, it is a pretty extreme policy, and is not really a sound way to run a society. Since families sometimes to have maternity and paternity leave more often than businesses are willing to supply, and since not every employee will have the foresight or power to negotiate maternity or paternity terms in their employment contracts, and especially since this issue is tied to keeping women down in that they are often made to quit altogether, it is a problem for which state intervention is, to some extent, appropriate.

The Family and Medical Leave Act guarantees 12 weeks medial leave for any woman having a child.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/

If you want to suggest that 12 weeks is insufficient, I can understand where you're coming from and might be inclined to agree with you, but if employers fire a woman who has a baby before 12 weeks leave is complete, that employer is in violation of federal labor law and that's no joke.

I think most employers nowadays understand about maternity leave and bite the bullet when it happens. A good employee is worth it. A bad employee? That's a different story.

I think really it's put up or shut up time for women in the workforce. I see women everyday who put their heads down and do a fantastic professional job, so when I see all this feminist excuse making it irks me.

I know of no such issue with the educational system. I've heard TRP arguments relating to the family law system, and, with the exception of child custody hearings, think the arguments I've heard are quite silly.

smh... I don't even know where to begin.

Acquaint yourself with Christina Hoff Sommers work on the subject of how public schools are failing boys. Look at graduation rates and overall scores of boys and girls in schools. Females are now vastly outpacing males in getting college educated. Still, feminists are pushing for policy that favors women, even though women represent a large majority of college students and grads.

Here's a summary article:

http://ideas.time.com/2013/08/19/school-has-become-too-hostile-to-boys/

When it comes to the way fathers are treated in the US, Canada and the UK, it's pretty shameful.

In the US, the VAWA eviscerates the rights of fathers. I could write 100 posts about the damage done to fathers and children as a result of the imbalanced family law system in the US (and I probably have).

Not really. We're equally protected by 14th amendment jurisprudence, and the legal protections afforded to women are usually targetted at things that have specifically to do with women, like maternity and prescription birth control... I'm not entirely sure where you want the law to protect men more than it protects women to "balance those out," if you think those effects should be "balanced out..."

Standards of justice aren't even remotely the same for men and women. VAWA is blatantly unconstitutional. The disparity is immense.

But, likewise, women can be raped on camera, and, even with that videotape evidence, the men responsible allowed to get off scott-free. Rape cases are really fucking hard to get right, and really fucking sensitive, and sometimes society overreacts in one direction, but more often it overreacts in the other.

There only one reason why anyone would make this claim - that would be to advocate for diminishing male due process rights. I don't even want to dignify it with a response.

I'm not saying there's not a problem, but it's really not so one-sided an issue as you say it is.

There is a growing problem of false accusations resulting from the "rape culture" narratives, changing rape definitions and non-prosecution of false accusers. They are growing bolder.

I've spent more on this comment than I really wanted to, but I wanted to cover all the points.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do you really think CEOs of multinational corporations pigeon hole women?

Not consciously or maliciously. But I believe that even big CEOs are human capable of bias and error. But the CEOs aren't the ones making many hiring decisions. The shareholders vote for the board (they are also perfectly capable of bias) and HR fills most of the rest of the positions and sets most of the rest of the salaries.

Shit most of these big corporate HR departments are run by women.

And women are incapable of being biased toward women? I'm pretty sure this is addressed in the article -- men and women alike have these biases.

What they care about is maximizing shareholder value. That is what is going to make them rich - and that's why they are in the game.

But they're not perfect at this. They use heuristics in hiring, and might try to account for their biases, but the biases are scientifically proven to persist.

If there is an effect of bias on wage, then its not a result of a confidence-gap, it's because of a lowered sense of urgency on the part of women who know they can lean on spouses as the family breadwinners.

Perhaps that's part of it to an extent. But perhaps it's also negotiating skill, and perhaps it's just because these intelligent HR departments realize that women, on average, will settle for less, have lower job offers elsewhere, and are otherwise in a distinct market from men. There might be some tacit collusion in there, if you think about it.

The issue of confidence is not a gendered one.

Source? The article I linked you to cites many sources for the proposition that it is.

If you want to suggest that 12 weeks is insufficient, I can understand where you're coming from and might be inclined to agree with you, but if employers fire a woman who has a baby before 12 weeks leave is complete, that employer is in violation of federal labor law and that's no joke.

Well, 12 weeks might be a little low, but that wasn't my point. My point was that 12 weeks wasn't excessive, and seemed like a good piece of state intervention that is not part of some conspiracy against men. Unless you want to tell me that 12 weeks is an absurdly high number that only a crazy feminazi would consider setting, I'm going to count this as a win.

think most employers nowadays understand about maternity leave and bite the bullet when it happens. A good employee is worth it.

Yeah, but a. some don't, and b. the law is probably a factor in that realization.

Acquaint yourself with Christina Hoff Sommers work on the subject of how public schools are failing boys. Look at graduation rates and overall scores of boys and girls in schools. Females are now vastly outpacing males in getting college educated.

I've heard some of these things, but in less panicked and extreme language. I'll look into it.

Still, feminists are pushing for policy that favors women, even though women represent a large majority of college students and grads.

Well, I largely see it in "STEM," which, as an alumnus of a tech school, I have to say is a good idea. There are certain social constructs, which we need to fix, that seem to be keeping women out of "STEM." Do you mean something else, in particular?

In the US, the VAWA eviscerates the rights of fathers.

How so? I missed this. You're not talking about those weird child kidnapping laws and funny divorce jurisdiction issues, are you?

Standards of justice aren't even remotely the same for men and women. VAWA is blatantly unconstitutional. The disparity is immense.

Well, for one, I remember Morrison being a close case and for good reasons. But second, I remember it coming out unconstitutional, so I'm not entirely clear what you're worried about -- I guess it has to do with parts of VAWA not addressed in that case... Because I'm quite certain that case has nothing to do with family law.

There only one reason why anyone would make this claim - that would be to advocate for diminishing male due process rights. I don't even want to dignify it with a response.

I... what? No, I'm perfectly concerned with false accusations of rape and what such accusations can do to even a man found innocent, but I don't believe male due process rights are actually diminishing, and do believe that rape cases still go wackily wrong in favor of the man at least as often as they do against. I absolutely don't see why you won't "dignify it with a response."

There is a growing problem of false accusations resulting from the "rape culture" narratives, changing rape definitions and non-prosecution of false accusers. They are growing bolder.

I don't really think this problem is nearly as large as you're implying it is. Do you have statistics on the rate of false accusations? I think the definitions of rape are just being ironed out and corrected, and not really changing for the worse. I also think false accusations of any crime rarely result in charges of perjury, unless there is actual evidence that it's perjury.

I've spent more on this comment than I really wanted to, but I wanted to cover all the points.

I appreciate it. I do the same quite often.

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

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

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

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcdehuevoRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcdehuevoRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]mcdehuevoRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]teeeloRed Pill5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (58 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–]teeeloRed Pill-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]teeeloRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Ok but you responded by nitpicking my stupid analogy instead of telling me your understood what I was saying.

TRP teaches men to not fall for the woman that plays stupid games. There was no lesson for them other than shit testing. Everyone tries to get away with something until they can't and because women were more able to do this it just escalated from there. Men like myself tried being understanding and nice, but they would just pull strings leaving us confused. It's not that they want to hurt us, it's that they are hypergamous.

I have read TRP, and the one question I asked you, you did not give me a clear answer. I did review the link in your OP but saw nothing that verified TRP thinks that about Women. Can you please site me something specific?

Preferably not one users rant about Woman, something more concrete.

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

[–]teeeloRed Pill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What's sexist is implying that there is some great mystery to women, that they are strange foreign beings whose motives and desires are impossible to comprehend.

But that is the opposite of what we imply. We imply there are some traits that are quite uniform in the market as it is observed. And there are clear patterns in social behaviour.

Overall, most women do like confidence, assertiveness, etc., like TRP says.

If this were all TRP was, I don't many of us would be here. I think you truly truly, want to believe TRP is just some excuse to be misogynist which also says "be confident brah. thats what those hoes want" as a token gesture. That is extraordinarily stupid way to sum up RP. Take this guy as he does an ELI5 on shit-tests: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2c41vk/why_is_there_a_discussion/cjctzmt?context=3

No, really, read that one reply.

Tell me if this one concept of dozens in RP can be summed up as women are aliens or women want confidence. Keep in mind, this is just his and Usherai's(they're two ECs) take on shit-tests. I have my own.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]robestaRed Pill Man-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]ConfusedTangles0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno-4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]aintdonegotno1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Yes, that's better since I can actually get where you're coming from and respond now, thanks.

I don't know why I had a hard time understanding women. Now that I have a toolkit that more or less works I don't think about it much. Like many people I'm pretty instrumental.

Fair enough, but then there are many people who have a hard time in social situations for many reasons, most often anxiety, which is something TRP tries to tackle directly (see getting over approach anxiety etc). This is a good aspect of TRP of course. And it's definitely true anyone who is already awkward will be extra awkward around a pretty girl.

Buuuut that said, that's not the same as what TRP does, which is act like women are out to get men and turn it into an us vs. them scenario in which you must learn the red pill method to avoid getting got, and you must avoid particular types of women TRP doesn't like because reasons. It's either that or be beta. It creates a very black and white worldview on purpose.

Acting like women are a different species wouldn't mean pedestalizing them any more than acting like cats are a different species would mean pedestalizing them.

But again you're using an analogy that is an actual other species. What I'm saying is that TRP acts like women are out manipulating and getting one over on men all the time and they're so hard to understand they're practically another species, which you're proving with analogies like this.

By talking about women in this way you are putting them on a pedestal because saying women are masters of manipulation who've taken over society (a red piller in this very thread even used that exact line) very much fits the definition of:

holding the woman in awe, genuflecting, or otherwise subordinating himself to her.

After all, women have taken over society and manipulate men constantly in a way most men cannot understand without reading up on theory first. That's quite the hefty pedestal.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]teeeloRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]teeeloRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]40WattsAmused Master3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OfSpock3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]duckducklandwhaleRed [like the Dried Rape Blood On My Sheets]4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]duckducklandwhaleRed [like the Dried Rape Blood On My Sheets]0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]la_sabotageTerp Terp Terp-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)-4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Is obeying every command from a man for the sake of the greater good,society,civilization or whatever "morally superior"?

... what? I don't think obeying commands serves "the greater good, society, civilization or whatever," and it obviously would not make one "morally superior. What are you talking about?

Because that is what happened when religions suppressed women, do you want to go back to that?

... what? Obviously not.

Female nature is female nature, it has to be understood and worked around for the benefit of both parties otherwise we would be moving backwards.

What? I don't care about that right now. I'm not asking whether or not we should strive to understand the nature of women. I'm saying your understanding of the nature of women is that they are morally inferior.

"morally inferior" is just a way to dance around the issue.

No, that's the issue, that's the question I'm asking, and you're dancing around it and refusing to answer. This is the issue for me: do you think women are morally inferior to men? To me, that is the issue. That is a fundamental question of this thread. If you are not answering it, you're dancing around the issue -- what the fuck are you even doing in this thread?

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Then what is "morally inferior" to you?

If you have no factors from which to measure one way or another it becomes irrelevant.

Can she be loyal? yes depending on the indoctrination.

Women are more religiously inclined then men, so a truly religious person would be loyal.

Female submissiveness go hand in hand with their loyalty,female submissiveness is also part of their nature so you cannot separate it from the equation of whether they are moral or not.

Do women with current social mindset are loyal? no absolutely not and we divorce rates statistics show that.

Would a women be more likely to help a beggar then a man, yes.

Would women care more about children? yes.

Would women help more in humanitarian projects? yes.

Is current women mindset an absolute disaster for civilization? absolutely.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Those 3 dependent on the women's willingness to submit to man.

Submissiveness is an inherent part of femininity.

Without it no they are not better then men.

And there is a good reason they shouldn't, men relationship with men will always be overall(although there is plenty of backstabbing here also) more "moral" by your definition, but this is not part of the sexual market, they don't have a whole mechanism for partner selection, gays do not make fucking babies.

This is why male with female "friendship" is such an abomination.

So no women are not horrible people, they are just different with different mechanisms and factors.

You declare war and fight until she surrenders.

That is what a male to female relationship is, that is how you ensure your respect,honesty and loyalty in your female partner.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Those 3 dependent on the women's willingness to submit to man.

Uggghhh... So you're saying, if a woman is not willing to submit to a man, and wants to try thinking for herself, then yes, she is inferior?

Submissiveness is an inherent part of femininity.

Just like the negroid brain is smaller, and they benefit from being controlled by the white man. Right?

Perhaps you don't realize that the pseudoscience you're basing this on is pseudoscience, or that it still doesn't support your hypothesis. Perhaps you genuinely don't see your dense bigotry, and think you're just stating a "biotruth." But you're wrong, and it's fucking hate speech.

Without it no they are not better then men.

Are they worse? If they submit, are they better?

but this is not part of the sexual market, they don't have a whole mechanism for partner selection, gays do not make fucking babies.

Wait, does "the sexual market" and "partner selection" only refer to baby-making sex and baby-making partners? I'm confused.

This is why male with female "friendship" is such an abomination.

For the record, I am living a lifestyle you would find quite abominable. I have many close female friends -- about as many as male, honestly -- and I'm quite happy with that.

You declare war and fight until she surrenders.

I... uh... shit. Dude, read that sentence again yourself. If you don't see the problem with it, I don't know if there's anything I can do for you, or for your poor victims.

that is how you ensure your respect,honesty and loyalty in your female partner.

Or, I can just find a partner who will be respectful and honest (I don't actually think loyalty is morally important, but that's a much deeper conversation that requires you to have some modicum of respect for other human beings, and not declare war against half of them).

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

So you're saying, if a woman is not willing to submit to a man, and wants to try thinking for herself, then yes, she is inferior?

Not inferior,you insist on that term. She will just use you and take half your stuff,because that is not actually happening in the real world now is it?

and it's fucking hate speech.

Some people deserve hate, I have no problems sending my hate towards feminists and white knights.

I'm confused.

Your stupid. you haven't even read the theory and understand nothing about it,otherwise you would have an idea about what I am talking about it even if you don't agree to it.

For the record, I am living a lifestyle you would find quite abominable.

Then you are an abomination.

I... uh... shit. Dude, read that sentence again yourself. If you don't see the problem with it, I don't know if there's anything I can do for you, or for your poor victims.

It's a metaphor you brain dead imbecile.

I can't even respond with logic and reasoning, your post is just too stupid, you have exceeded my threshold.

[–]danhakimiTalking about pills is stupid0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not inferior,you insist on that term.

That's the term we're trying to discuss, and you still don't seem to be willing to admit it's a real word.

She will just use you and take half your stuff,because that is not actually happening in the real world now is it?

Is that an evil thing to do?

Is that how you believe women who refuse to be obedient and submissive behave?

If so, Would you say that when women think for themselves, they are evil, and only when they do what they told are they not evil?

Some people deserve hate, I have no problems sending my hate towards feminists and white knights.

But you're not using it to refer to "feminists and white nights," you're using it to refer to "women." Do you think women deserve hate?

Your stupid.

Ah, two words never combined without irony.

you haven't even read the theory and understand nothing about it,otherwise you would have an idea about what I am talking about it even if you don't agree to it.

I've read a whole lot of TRP theory. I'm still not entirely clear on what you think of gay people. Do they not have sex? Do they not select partners? I understand that you care about the marketplace you're a part of more, but don't really understand how men who like other men "don't have a whole mechanism for partner selection."

Then you are an abomination.

Excellent, thank you. I will go on with my platonic friendships with women. I hope that keeps you awake at night.

It's a metaphor you brain dead imbecile.

Sure. Read the metaphor again yourself. If you don't see the problem with it, I don't know if there's anything I can do for you, or for your poor victims.

[–]sh1vRed Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Red pill: if women are inferior to men then how come you need a whole community and a strategy to deal with them?

Comments

mirin