RP is the best damn thing that ever happened to me, and let me tell you why.. [RPW Post]

masterrod · 2014-05-20T14:23:00+00:00

I randomly saw this post.. I think it's a post for all those that despise Red Pill.. RP is great What does PPD think of this post? Is she delusional or...

[–][deleted] 21 points21 points21 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]whatevswhatevs10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]whatevswhatevs3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Yeahhh, no. Maybe that's your personal belief, but that's not what those words mean.

Masculine: Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men, especially strength and aggressiveness.

Just to be really clear:

Strength - The quality or state of being strong, the power to move heavy weights or perform other physically demanding tasks.

Aggression - Hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.

Neither of these things have anything to do with dominance (power and influence over others) especially in our hypersocial modern world where physicality is starting to mean less and less. If you're using strength and aggression to dominate someone in a physical way (the only way a man has a distinct advantage over a woman) chances are you're breaking the law. This isn't something to be encouraged at all, much less as a relationship dynamic.

Feminine: Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with women, especially delicacy and prettiness.

Delicate: Very fine in texture or structure; of intricate workmanship or quality.

Pretty: Attractive in a delicate way.

Femininity has nothing to do with submission, the action or fact of accepting or yielding to a superior force or to the will or authority of another person. Lots of women use their femininity to socially dominate men who are attracted to them.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Yeahhh, no. Maybe that's your personal belief, but that's not what those words mean.

I would say historical view. I can't deny it's my own personal belief as well.

Masculine: Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men, especially strength and aggressiveness.

This is incomplete. This is a dictionary definition. If the dictionary defined to the fullest the dictionary would be humongous.

Feminine: Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with women, especially delicacy and prettiness.

Another dictionary definition.

Feminine can be strong as well. In fact the feminine is the most powerful, could even be the most aggressive. Do you ever wonder why we say Mother Earth, or Storms have female names? Feminine differs from masculine because true feminine lacks direction.

Masculine nature isn't the most powerful by a long shot, but it's the most directed. When we talk about great men the accomplished great things, they tamed great uncertainty, and they are fearless..

The reason why I talk in these terms is because they are truly historical, but also because it allows you to think about how women and men fit together. There's no way to know how much masculine or feminine is in any given person. However, we learn from talking about archetypes, or extremities.

[–]whatevswhatevs2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]whatevswhatevs4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Well if your'e dating or seducing women it's pretty useful.

When dealing with women you must understand that she is more powerful than you. She can mow you down with her emotions, she could decapitate you because of an emotional whim. That's the feminine.

Feminine power is to form connections, and eschew things that stop connecting among all things. Feminine is also known as life, that's why we say "Mother Earth". Feminine only has one goal and that is the continuing of life of all things. This is why dance, art, etc are spoken about in a feminine way, in all cases it's life re-imagined. Even artists that are male appear feminine in many cases, in fact it's desirable. Hell even famed economists have statues of vaginas in their condos, to represent this type of theory as it relates to the market. All because the market is feminine. :)

The masculine is much more about direction, and death. The masculine is going to get things, seeking a victory, a goal, an achievement, war, etc.

I think you take this as meaning a woman can't have direction. That's not what I'm saying. Rather I'm defining two poles of people, and also of relationships.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dip_the_DogBlue Pill Man8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaniSue130 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DaniSue130 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

(sorry for my english beforehand, I'm still practicing)

You know, you hear enough detractors, you start to recognize how they've agreed with you all along. The only way I can understand when you make these statements

There is nothing wrong with seeking a traditionalist relationship and seeking to embody a traditional gender role. If that leads to your happiness and satisfaction, awesome!

Everyone has the right to pursue their own happiness, whatever that means for them.

And then also profess to have "beef" with redpill is because you profoundly misunderstand what the point of redpill is.

beef with TRP philosophy is its assumption that all women must seek a traditional relationship and embody a traditional gender role

If you go on the sub and try to say this(try and do so now, pick an older user preferably), this is glaring redflag you will give to anyone RP you're talking to. They will automatically dismiss you as a troll who's never read anything as soon as you use the word "must". We don't tell anyone what they should do. We don't tell anyone what they shouldn't.

We outline simply what's the best route to the best results given the two sexes' general sexual strategies. In the same way you could profile the sexual behaviours of lions or penguins, we think about the same for humans(working as generally and liberally as necessary), figuring out what works best for an individual given the playing field that exists. Now, what follows from that in TRP is men are free to decry how the sexual revolution puts them at an enormous disadvantage and be aware, and possibly, if they want... be bitter at how the betas suffer and are at disadvantage for the benefit of the feminine and alpha, but that doesn't mean we think we have any right to tell these people what they should do.

Its just the fact that it is a genuinely zero-sum game. Because of the established balance being thrown out the window, one is getting seriously screwed over and treated worse. Hypergamous women are often actually praised in threads and acknowledged as acting out their sexual imperative well. It is even good for the species. It is not good for the individual betas. The voices you hear are consciously acting out of self-interest. They are self-righteous voices in their tone because they correctly realize that both gender's sexual strategies can and would be fulfilled if only there was a balanced system in place taking into account their dual natures. Redpill as a sexual strategy is about artificially reimposing the controls that bring both sexes back into fairness and harmony. Most people, however, in line with human nature, choose to abandon and abuse the system they're bitter and angry at, and just "use" as many women as they possibly can, just because they can. They stick with us because our ideas of what drives attraction work, and its addicting to these people to have that kind of power.

If women can run rampant, we'll join the men they are running rampant with. We'll join this sexual revolution purely out of self-interest and take as many spoils as we can. No amount of criticism otherwise will convince them to come back to the table. Only an appeal to a balanced status quo, which believe it or not a lot of genuinely want. Love, basically. Something we feel feminized western women don't offer anymore. So we forego all that and pump and dump. Just because we want something doesn't mean redpill is a movement

If we were a movement we would have a PR division, and we would care about correcting your preconceptions about us. We would have an overarching goal of some sort. Or cooperation. But we don't. All there is here exists just because it does. Sexual strategy is amoral. We have no responsibility nor inclination to tell you how to use it, nor any interest in correcting you when you say you want to use it for any certain thing.

The fact that the ideas discussed here are controversial is in the damn title. A gist of the material and how its meant to be interpreted becomes apparent within a week or two of lurking. As far as a PR division goes, you have a few hundred RPers who sometimes visit a sub about debating it while the rest never mention RP ideas outside the sub, real life or reddit.

This is a good discussion on the subject: http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/24yu8x/discussion_the_admins_just_took_the_most_feminist/chc7ywy

I_kill_eu paints the picture I'm failing at perfectly. Redpill is not about telling people what they should do. Every single post of his there embodies RP as most of us see it.

[–][deleted] 16 points16 points16 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Obviously they're not forcing anyone to do anything but they do believe everyone should act in a way that follows their own definition of "natural" and "right" in order to be happy.

And that's perfectly fine. I don't see this contradiction MissCheesyPants is talking about.

Too often, PC police have a tendency of conflating categorical and hypothetical imperatives. I hope we don't turn into one of them, and be completely ignorant of ethics.

We_Are_Legion was referring to a hypothetical imperative with his "should do/shouldn't do".

I.e. "If you want to be successful [at this], you should do [as thus]." That is an opinion you can agree or disagree with. It's supposed to be logical advice you can choose to follow or not follow. It's not compulsory. This was implied, but obvious.

MissCheesyPants is treating this "should do/shouldn't do" as though We_Are_Legion was talking about a categorical imperative. Compulsory by moral or social obligation. "You have to do as thus. It's the 'right' (or moral) thing to do."

Besides, if we are going to overdramatize this, then why not everything else? Bpers are guilty of censorship, trying to tell everyone what to say and what not to say. Even for merely suggesting that "if you're verbally offensive, then you won't make many friends" ... How dare they tell us what to do!

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think I made a mistake in substituting the word that you used ("must") with "should". (I warned you my english is practicing, I tried to avoid the repetition.)

That said, lets go with the point you raised anyway; you're right. Redpill does outline what "should" be done in pursuit of a certain goal. But RP itself isn't a religion that calls for an overhaul or pulling people off the street that says they "must" do X and Y. Even in cases where it advises you on what you should do in pursuit of a goal, it actually doesn't advise you on your end objective itself. (almost)Ever.

When you claim we see this as "only way to achieve happiness", you ignore the fact that Redpill isn't magic, it is a specific collection on thought on how to do X well. A lot of the time, it deals with strategy about leveraging attraction for maximum possible gain. Attraction is tied to gender by its very nature and for our ideas, we have gone back to the basics, and we find, through extensive trial and error, that YES, traditional gender roles actually are attractive. Far more than modern variants of gender roles. They are a simple route to success most men aren't even aware of or how to pull off. Redpill will advise you on how to do this. Individuals will tell you it makes them happy, but RP itself has never and will never do so. (In fact, RP holds you can't really even achieve gender roles realistically for most people.)

You ignore all the MGTOW on RP who insist they're actually fine and happy dating NO women, or on the opposite spectrum, the obsessive players who still think the traditional gender roles are shitty, effort-demanding and repulsive and they hate doing it for women. They simply do it because it is what women reward. And they are, as individuals, arrogant about people who dismiss their experience while having none(women come to mind here).

If you have a fetish for being cuckolded or of having femdom or you have a taste for women who are masculine and want to pursue those, it isn't called out or criticized on RP. Most people who simply don't have anything to contribute to the discussion wont participate, tell you "good for you" and skim over(try it. tell them you're turned on by masculine women). And as such, it'll likely get buried. When e.g. alttrp was made for homosexual people, the gist of the motive wasn't homophobia, it was to create a focused community for an obscure and thus, marginalized section of sexual strategy on redpill. We don't think traditional gender roles for homosexuals even exist, but we think that a no-bullshit approach to success in that market can and does exist, and we will figure it out... how best attraction can be created and gamed for maximum returns there. Through trial and error on the field, and discussion in light of RP theory.

Choice of sexual strategy is your business, and it is not homogeneous on RP at all. Take for example, the hilariously specificness of the individual game advice. "stripper" game for example, aka how to seduce or date a stripper. You'd think RP would find them repulsive or sluts, but there's blogs and material on that. And so is there on a variety of other things, like how to approach seducing a married women or how to approach and get fat women and then get her to slim down or how to make a woman excited and feeling adventurous or even how to make her feel special and loved or be romantic. It goes on and on.

Now, following from this, another strange thing you ignore; RP is extremely unwilling to help you decide what your END-GOAL is. Whether the obscure MGTOW niche is what you're looking for, or whether you want a LTR or you want to control your marriage or you simply want to fuck around... People who tolerate you asking for hand-holding to figure out if any of that is what you really want are a minority on even the Q&A section.

So you see, no one presumes to tell anyone what they "must" do. If you're fine with your life as is, why are you on red pill pursuing that extra push? All we have is advice on how to pursue self-interest and leverage attraction... But if your chosen path is, say collecting plates for "plate spinning", you'll find a buzz of people busy with discussions on that. If it is LTR game, you'll find how to control your wife within an egalitarian system. Or how to consensually set up a working Captain/First mate dynamic. The mantle of a masculine identity and leadership is seen as key to most of the strategies redpill's heterosexual majority devotes itself to dealing with, simply because how else would a man create raw animal attraction to work with for self-interest? Its not that its the only goal for happiness. Its that its all we have as a strategy that is distinct from BP. And so that dominates discussion. But what masculine means in specific situations is also completely open to change("beta" game as the most glaring example).

If as a newbie, like iKill_eu pointed out, you just skim shit, that may be the impression you get, but again, the vibe you'll always get on TRP is: that's not our responsibility to correct. We don't care about correcting people generally, even to the detriment of the community sometimes. We simply refuse to temper the tone of the discussion to idiots and children(and women) who have no business there in the first place if they're simply there for mental masturbation and not informed self-interest and exchanging information. You have to know what you're there for. The key word though is information. On sexual strategy and identity that you're pursuing. Not social commentary. We can bitch about society all we want(read "stages of redpill". see the posts on goals and expectations), we can bitch about how so and so doesn't work, or how such and such market is stacked but trying to start a movement and other shit on RP is likely to get you banned. In fact, it does get people banned. We do not push our views elsewhere.

The mainstream's spotlight on redpill is strange for a community that is normally quite discrete and keeps to itself. Even the manosphere doesn't have the goal of being recognized, simply to help men take the actions that serve their self-interest best. To help people achieve what they want. Without having their wants demonized as fetishes or caveman thinking by modern day society. No ambitions to take over the world. Only banter about how things might be better considering what we know. About the strategies itself... well, sexual strategy is as the chant goes, inherently selfish and amoral. We make no claims to the contrary, and never did. It merely exists as information. We offer discussion on how to make and wield a hammer, but little on what to do with it. That is on you.

But people come there and they see the mere existence of this information... and they're threatened. They're provoked. They can't go two sentences without having their political correctness conditioning give them an itch. They legitimately think if something does not match their opinions of correct tone or thought, they have a right to go to this self-contained group and attack it.

Now, again, when you say >"Everyone has the right to pursue their own happiness, whatever that means for them."

How can you not be 100% in line with TRP's and RPW's own given defense about their existence?

If you argue that RP teaches men how to take advantage of women, then I think you're a bit naive to think such advice would not exist in the absence of the RP group of blogs and books and forums. And also ignoring the agency of the women we supposedly exploit. They are adults and free to leave and RP would never advise anything illegal, simply because it is probably not in your self-interest. If you think they don't exist, even more reason to drop the silly internet SJW pursuit. Who are they harming but themselves in their delusion anyway?

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The TRP community asserts that "women universally behave this way" and "men universally behave this way" according to their hard-wired, biological imperative

No. RP merely tries to see patterns. What else can we do? We don't deal with individuals. That is impossible. We deal with trends.

Let me place to you an over-simplified analogy that outlines where I think you have a misconception with redpill. Consider what the purpose of your life and your ideals of happiness are based on. What your ideal of a perfect harmonious world is based on. Possibly it can be generalized to be avoidance of pain and pursuit of pleasure. (Not hedonistic sex, I mean, just simple happy things for now, ok?) Hm... consider, that marriage and any romantic relationship in fact, are an inherently irrational thing. If an alien swooped down and asked you why you are doing this, you probably wouldn't be able to rationally explain it(lets disregard the old functions of marriage, we must speak to the alien in terms of now and OURSELVES), right? "Its a human thing."

The fact is, we're not reaally doing it even for the tax benefits. We're not doing this because socially cooperation is advantageous(not all relationships even carry this perk at all actually) or any of that stuff. Usually we're doing this to satisfy animal feelings. "I'm lonely", "I get feelings in the pit of my stomach from being with her", "He gives me a happy", "I'm horny and I want him in me", "She has BREASTS", etc.

We're really following the cues of our feelings. That's it. We can rationalize to ourselves after the fact all we want but that's how you explain it to the alien. And when those feelings fade, no amount of compatibility will hold two people together indefinitely. Honestly, I think people are really no better than herd animals. Their whole life they have a carrot and stick relationship with their master; feelings. They avoid pain and build their life to minimize it. And they seek pleasure, working forever to seek it. They may have freedom to decide how to go about doing this, but the map is set by their feelings. That is the basic meaning of all their actions. The rules are there. And most of the herd animals will never deviate from this basic dynamic.

If you train a wild horse, how do you get the horse to respond to running on a command? The non-idealistic answer is train him to expect pain when he doesn't respond to his rider and food if he does. He is not cognizant of this grand purpose, but he knows when to move. He knows to avoid pain. Fortunately for most us animals, part of growing up is like this, learning hard what hurts and what feels good, and we favour those behaviours which feel good and run like mad from those our feelings prod us away from. We are afraid to even go near pain.

Pain is a way of life telling you you are not on track with your biological purpose. It is information before the senses, telling you you're failing. And to get back on track. Pleasure is a way to tell you, yes! This is a good means to get closer to your end objective(which seems to be to reproduce. absence of god, thats what our purpose would boil down to in the grand scheme of life). An animal's entire life can be spent just following the push and pull dynamic between the instincts of pleasure and pain and it'll fulfill its purpose: survive long enough to pass on its genes. Which is all the pleasure and pain dynamic seems to be built to maximise and lead to. As humans, we have higher order reasoning too. Individuals are hard to predict. But overall, we still seek to maximize and minimize the two respectively.

The fact is... when you're consciously trying to maximise on those instincts, its not hard to control the horse when you know what they're afraid of and what they want. That is a bit, kind of like what RPers do. We utilize instincts that already exists to get what we want. And we are by and large, addictingly good at it.

Now, you can pretend this dynamic doesn't exist. In you, for example. But it does. It defines you. And you too can be "gamed", by someone experienced enough in the tricks of pleasure and pain. All they need to do is be discrete in how they're controlling you.

Most people and most systems of the world somehow do take advantage of this dynamic. Consciously, or subconsciously. RPers are slaves to it too. We just accept we're more slaves than most, and exchange amoral strategy.

[–]rulenumber30314 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

She's been with this guy what, maybe two years? Hormones still raging, on both sides.

*A RP relationship is just that - demanding the best from your partner, and giving them your best in return. *

Let's see how it goes over the next decade, especially if it goes through a phase where she has to be the one demanding he pull his shit together. If he gains thirty pounds and becomes no longer attractive. If he gets grumpy. If he's not being as involved a father as he should be. If he hits the dreadgame too hard and she gets to the stage where she'd rather leave than feel more dread. I totally agree that in a marriage the couple should each insist on the other giving their best. Redpill guys seem to be the sort of dudes who approve of that in theory, but balk at the reality and dismiss it as a "shit test".

[–]DaniSue130 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]rulenumber3030 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DaniSue130 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]myfriendscantknowAgent Orangered (BP Man)9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cuittlerಠ_ಠ10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

She seems to have had a lot of the same issues rp guys have starting out: not a lot of respect for herself, attracting people who also disrespect her, blaming her woes on the opposite sex while being completely aware she is not at the height of her attractiveness.

It seems like she is happy now so good for her, I just don't think she understood feminism in the first place and she's only doing now what she did before: trying to find some place to lay blame for the issues she was having. Before it was 'men' and now that place is 'feminism'.

she...rejects female friendships, and calls herself a feminist because of it

How is rejecting female friendship supposed to be feminist?

My feminist ideals almost destroyed me. They made me blame men and desire to distance myself from "other girls." They told me it was okay to be masculine and aggressive, and that my mental disorders weren't my fault and I shouldn't have to take responsibility for them. I could do whatever I want and behave however I wanted, and if anyone didn't like it they could suck my dick.

The only thing here I could maybe take as feminism is the being "masculine and aggressive" part. I wouldn't interpret that as acting like an asshole, but acting assertive rather than passive. If she didn't make that connection it's not feminism's fault. The rest is just immature nonsense people think when they're young.

I realize you can't answer for her so I'll just say delusional.

[–]GODZILLAFLAMETHROWERBlue Pill Man6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

1 - I don't think her problem was ever feminism, it was her twisted interpretation of it due to her issues that resulted from her dysfunctional family life. She sounds more feminist after her recovery than before.

2 - I don't think there is anything wrong with traditional relationships and wanting one. That being said, I do believe many red pillers are not suited for any type of relationship. I think what she found was a decent man who wanted a traditional relationship, not a man who is preoccupied with hatred for women and a grotesquely warped belief that his partner is inferior to him and thus he needs to treat her as a child. There is some degree of respect that is required in every relationship. Even successful traditional relationships are partnerships, just with the man and women having specific roles.

3 - It is mildly concerning that a girl coming from a dysfunctional family and an abusive father entered a relationship in which a "man leads, woman follows." I wonder if, in a way, she is seeking fatherhood. I also think it leaves her vulnerable to abusers, and thus she is at the mercy of the people she dates. So hopefully for her sake, she picked a good guy.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

It's unfair to say that most RPs aren't suitable for relationships, and it's not only wildly inaccurate.

So you think it's unfair because it's inaccurate? Hm, ok.

I disagree. I think many RP are angry, resentful and bitter towards women. I present the entire subreddit as my evidence. Most of the most upvoted threads and posts do exhibit a lot of misogyny and hatred. And I believe those individuals, whether their anger is temporary or not, would not make good partners. Angry people in general don't, but if the anger/bitterness happens to be women and you are in a relationship with a woman, then it especially doesn't, at the least in that moment. The anger and resentment interferes with bonding and love/attachment, it interferes with respect, and it interferes with problem-solving. You are likely to dismiss your partner's feelings, refuse to compromise, and further resent your partner over every minor thing you misinterpret as validating your existing beliefs about the nature of women.

Same goes for misandrists. If you hate men, you're not going to be able to be in a relationship with a man until you stop exhibiting/believing misandry. (EDIT: point in case, the OP of the post was incapable of having a solid relationship while she was hating men. Her behavior and thinking then I think is the inverse mirror of many Red Pillers).

Additionally, many have pretty warped belief of the biological or psychological nature of women. For example...hamstering, hypergamy..etc. These are HUMAN natures. If you are focusing on your partner's, but ignoring your own rationalizations, that's not going to bode well for a relationship.

And lastly, many's expectations of the dynamics of a relationship are very selfish and self-serving. Woman should be this and this and this and do this and this and this, and if she doesn't, she's to be nexted. As far as what you offer? "Don't let her in, don't show weakness or show your emotions, dread game her to let her know you have options, make her work hard for your time." etc etc. So a woman should give and comply with everything, but her partner is told to only give a small, calculated amount in return? That's not what a relationship is, traditional or not.

And the way that some talk, traditional relationships to them are more master/slave, not traditional relationships. As I've said, traditional relationships are still partnerships, just with specialized skills and roles. I've never seen that acknowledged on TRP. And if someone has hinted at it, they were downvoted.

It is the norm. We are more likely to replay what we've seen then create new ones.

It really isn't though. We ARE more likely to go with what we know, which is ourselves. Thus why most people date people similar to them.

A lot of seduction theory is based on these ideas.

A lot of seduction theory is also wrong.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. I think many RP are angry, resentful and bitter towards women. I present the entire subreddit as my evidence. Most of the most upvoted threads and posts do exhibit a lot of misogyny and hatred. And I believe those individuals, whether their anger is temporary or not, would not make good partners. Angry people in general don't, but if the anger/bitterness happens to be women and you are in a relationship with a woman, then it especially doesn't, at the least in that moment. The anger and resentment interferes with bonding and love/attachment, it interferes with respect, and it interferes with problem-solving. You are likely to dismiss your partner's feelings, refuse to compromise, and further resent your partner over every minor thing you misinterpret as validating your existing beliefs about the nature of women.

You are right about anger, but it's unresolved anger, not just anger, that hurts relationships on both sides. In that case RP offers a way to resolve the anger. I think people that can admit their faults and do something about it, are key people to be in relationships. It's that type of vulnerability that makes people better people, and consequently gives way to good relationships. That's what goes on in RP.

Additionally, many have pretty warped belief of the biological or psychological nature of women. For example...hamstering, hypergamy..etc. These are HUMAN natures. If you are focusing on your partner's, but ignoring your own rationalizations, that's not going to bode well for a relationship.

You're right they are human. However, when you are with a woman you don't have time to figure out her human characteristics. You must react quickly, swiftly, and fearlessly or you can user. These are good assumptions for initial conditions that can get you laid and save your pocket and heart when you stick your dick in a "bad" hole.

And lastly, many's expectations of the dynamics of a relationship are very selfish and self-serving. Woman should be this and this and this and do this and this and this, and if she doesn't, she's to be nexted. As far as what you offer? "Don't let her in, don't show weakness or show your emotions, dread game her to let her know you have options, make her work hard for your time." etc etc. So a woman should give and comply with everything, but her partner is told to only give a small, calculated amount in return? That's not what a relationship is, traditional or not.

Well this is very interesting. Well I think timing is important. In the beginning, you shouldn't be giving much and let her give more than you. The reason is that a women, in general, prefers to be giver. Additionally, a big problem people, men and women, make the mistake that too much giving creates guilt in the receiver, and guilt can make a relationship fail. It is extremely important to understand this when it comes to relationships.
Now, you may disagree but the idea of RP is to place the woman in her natural desire to give, and to give to a man that's worth it. But also the idea is not to reward her with your time, if she has not earned it. This allows man to play on her insecurities, and her passive aggressive side, and ultimately he can be successful in the onset. As time progresses, different games must be employed.

And the way that some talk, traditional relationships to them are more master/slave, not traditional relationships. As I've said, traditional relationships are still partnerships, just with specialized skills and roles. I've never seen that acknowledged on TRP. And if someone has hinted at it, they were downvoted.

Well this is just sensitivity to feminism. I will guarantee you that a very small percentage of RPrs have a true master/slave relationship with their mates. Especially, if they live in America.

It really isn't though. We ARE more likely to go with what we know, which is ourselves. Thus why most people date people similar to them.

It would be nice but no. We are more likely to date people who closely emulate the behavior of our parents. We can agree to disagree.

A lot of seduction theory is also wrong.

Is there some better way to seduce a lady?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

In that case RP offers a way to resolve the anger

Once again, this where I disagree.

Maybe it's the original intention, but in my views and experiences with TRP, it seems to only amplify it by being a concentrated source of examples of horrible women, and at the same time exhibiting group think and confirmation bias by the memembers. Your view gets very niched and distorted. You are bombared with statements that "AWALT," and that "there is no unicorn," (with unicorn expanded to mean any decent woman, not just a perfect woman) "women cannot love you like you want to be loved, they only love what you give them," etc. This is why you see posts (for as long as they're allowed up by mods) about RP men complaining that swallowing TRP has made them angrier. Who wouldn't become angrier if that is what they are shown and taught?

If it diffuses anger, it does so in a very patronizing way. "Oh you can't be mad at women, it's in their nature to be hypergamous and use good men while they screw them over. It's in their nature to be solipsistic and not care about you. You can't be mad at a dog for pissing on the carpet. We'll show you how to not get screwed over by their nature." This aspect of RP view does decrease the anger but it replaces it with something equally destructive for a relationship.

I think people that can admit their faults and do something about it, are key people to be in relationship

Agreed and that's why I did not say ALL RP.

Well I think timing is important. In the beginning, you shouldn't be giving much and let her give more than you. The reason is that a women, in general, prefers to be giver.

It's funny, but I've seen the same advice given to women. "He should be the one that calls you, he should ask you out, he should take you out to dinner." I don't think women, in general, prefer to be givers, especially when many women outright state that they prefer to be chased, and there is some pretty solid evidence to suggest that. I think it depends on person to person.

But I also think it's healthiest to do an equal amount of "push and pull," for both partners, while at the same time maintaining self control to not get carried away by momentary infatuation. You don't want to get too emotionally invested until you know you're compatible, and this is something that rings true in both genders.

Well this is just sensitivity to feminism

Regardless of the reason, it is what it is. If your expectation of a traditional relationship is one thing, but everyone else including your partner has a different perception of a traditional relationship, things aren't going to go well.

Is there some better way to seduce a lady?

Not sure what you mean. I didn't say all of seduction theory. Aspects of it are wrong. Seduction theory and seduction tactics do fail.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Maybe it's the original intention, but in my views and experiences with TRP, it seems to only amplify it by being a concentrated source of examples of horrible women, and at the same time exhibiting group think and confirmation bias by the memembers. Your view gets very niched and distorted. You are bombared with statements that "AWALT," and that "there is no unicorn," (with unicorn expanded to mean any decent woman, not just a perfect woman) "women cannot love you like you want to be loved, they only love what you give them," etc. This is why you see posts (for as long as they're allowed up by mods) about RP men complaining that swallowing TRP has made them angrier. Who wouldn't become angrier if that is what they are shown and taught?

All this information is true. One of the hardest things for people to do is to separate the person from their vision of that person. Often times we try to hold on to a vision of a person that no longer, or never existed. The reality is there isn't really a unicorn, but we cannot get the time we spent with great people back. Also, no one can love you the way you want in your head, you have to communicate with them how you would like to be loved. Men typically consider women like men, and measure them against the same criteria as men would deal with men. This is a big mistake, and men have to be aware of that mistake.

You have to take TRP hate with a grain of salt, cause they talk about how to sleep with and be in relationships with women. If they truly hated women they should go after men.

It's funny, but I've seen the same advice given to women. "He should be the one that calls you, he should ask you out, he should take you out to dinner."

This advice for women that have been screwed over, or that typically give to much.

I don't think women, in general, prefer to be givers, especially when many women outright state that they prefer to be chased, and there is some pretty solid evidence to suggest that. I think it depends on person to person.

It's true it's based on the person. However, a typically reason why women leave men is because the man gives too much, to the point they have no place. The most important thing is to understand your woman, and how she views her self. That's key. But moreover, she needs a place in your life that she earned. If you're just showering her with gifts, you're losing in most cases.

But I also think it's healthiest to do an equal amount of "push and pull," for both partners, while at the same time maintaining self control to not get carried away by momentary infatuation.

Equal is for friends. In relationships it's never equal. The inequality breeds passion.

You don't want to get too emotionally invested until you know you're compatible, and this is something that rings true in both genders.

I disagree with this. You should go full force if you can. Heart break is only momentary. The more heart break you have the deeper you can love. Compatibility is a bit of myth, IMO. I'd rather make sure you're with someone that you can grow endlessly with, that's the most important.

Regardless of the reason, it is what it is. If your expectation of a traditional relationship is one thing, but everyone else including your partner has a different perception of a traditional relationship, things aren't going to go well.

I couldn't agree more. Expectations are key.

Not sure what you mean. I didn't say all of seduction theory. Aspects of it are wrong. Seduction theory and seduction tactics do fail.

Well considering one of the most important parts of seduction is sorting, I'm not sure what you mean. But I will agree that there's no seduction blue print that's 100% effective.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You have to take TRP hate with a grain of salt, cause they talk about how to sleep with and be in relationships with women. If they truly hated women they should go after men.

Not really.

First off, you can't make yourself like men if you don't.

Second of all, anger doesn't erase the natural desires to love or be loved, or the desire for sex. Angry Red Pillers are still human, they WANT those things. They're just angry that they haven't been successfully able to achieve those things, from their perception, and they think it's the other party's fault. Anger from not being able to get those things. Anger at not being treated like they thought they should. Anger at a breakup or being cheated on or being hurt.

I do think fundamentally all Red Pillers WANT a successful relationship, whether serious or casual, with a woman. They just don't know how to do it and are angry as a result. They resent women for failure to understand them or to succeed with them because it's easier.

Also noteworthy, some Red Pillers do give up on women altogether. MGTOW. I think most don't because it's hard to overcome the above desires. Companionship and sex is something we crave, and it's hard to give up that craving no matter how angry or disillusioned you are.

This advice for women that have been screwed over, or that typically give to much.

Same can be said of that advice being given to men who typically have been screwed over, or give too much.

I think you seem like a very reasonable person, but I think in this one single instance, you are being pretty biased.

However, a typically reason why women leave men is because the man gives too much, to the point they have no place.

Men also leave women who give too much, are too supplicating and too clingy. If you are the kind of person who perhaps hasn't had much experience with women and are a tad bit desperate, this might be appealing but to most people a clingy overbearing woman is not entirely appealing.

I mean hell, how many perfect homemakers, women whose sole existence is to serve their household, their man, and raise their children, have been cheated on?

I think people in general like some degree of challenge. It's in human nature to get complacent and take things for granted if they are readily available (how many times do you think about water or air or electricity?) A woman who is completely doting and giving will never get the same respect a woman who is more reserved about giving. Same with a spineless man who does everything for his girlfriend/wife. He will never get the same respect that someone who is more assertive will get.

People who are easily accessible,readily available, and don't challenge you to compromise will not hold much value in your life because you know the risks of losing them are low. Sad but true for both genders.

TRP goes a bit overboard on this, and only attributes it to "men must not be pushovers" but it is true for both genders.

Equal is for friends. In relationships it's never equal. The inequality breeds passion.

Disagree. Equality I think often gets confused for either complete complacency and lack of passion or endless bickering. Not the same. I think some people, however, are better suited to unequal relationships. Especially those that struggle in picking compatible partners, or perhaps have insecurities or perhaps simply require more doting by their partner. Those people are not made for equal partnerships, but I think it's disingenuous to say equality does not exist or does not breed passion.

I don't think it would be presumptuous to state that you prefer women to be more of the giver in your personal relationships, and that is perfectly fine, it is a personal preference, but I only have a problem with your extrapolation of personal preference as the ideal to everyone.

I've been in relationships where I had "more power," where the other person had, "more power," and equal relationships. For me, passion was always stronger in equal relationships because there was a stronger bond and more of a desire to maintain such a unique and special connection ("I'm happy and lucky with what I have"). More power/less power relationships were my younger relationships where I didn't know how to pick partners, and neither me nor my partner were secure enough to maintain equality. He had too much power just made me angry and resentful. I had more power made me take him for granted. Neither lasted long after the power imbalance was created.

Compatibility is a bit of myth, IMO. I'd rather make sure you're with someone that you can grow endlessly with, that's the most important.

That's what compatibility is. Compatibility isn't a perfect match, it's finding someone you can live with and stand to be around after chemical infatuation wears off.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

First off, you can't make yourself like men if you don't.

Why do you think that's true?

Second of all, anger doesn't erase the natural desires to love or be loved, or the desire for sex

Love and sex are two totally different things. But again, everyone can have unresolved anger. It's one the most important things to be able to drain in a relationship. If RPers get all their anger out on reddit, they can be more successful in future relationships.

Men also leave women who give too much, are too supplicating and too clingy. If you are the kind of person who perhaps hasn't had much experience with women and are a tad bit desperate, this might be appealing but to most people a clingy overbearing woman is not entirely appealing.

Guilt & place is the key here. RP is about alleviating these two emotions in a relationship.

I mean hell, how many perfect homemakers, women whose sole existence is to serve their household, their man, and raise their children, have been cheated on?

What does infidelity have to do with anything?

(how many times do you think about water or air or electricity?)

A lot. :)

TRP goes a bit overboard on this, and only attributes it to "men must not be pushovers" but it is true for both genders.TRP goes a bit overboard on this, and only attributes it to "men must not be pushovers" but it is true for both genders.

yep

Disagree. Equality I think often gets confused for either complete complacency and lack of passion or endless bickering. Not the same. I think some people, however, are better suited to unequal relationships. Especially those that struggle in picking compatible partners, or perhaps have insecurities or perhaps simply require more doting by their partner. Those people are not made for equal partnerships, but I think it's disingenuous to say equality does not exist or does not breed passion.

I don't think you can create passion in an equal partnership. You must some place where you are uneven. Teeth in a gear. If you're too similar you won't mesh. Moreover, people are malleable, so I truly believe compatibility is a myth.

I don't think it would be presumptuous to state that you prefer women to be more of the giver in your personal relationships, and that is perfectly fine, it is a personal preference, but I only have a problem with your extrapolation of personal preference as the ideal to everyone.

I'm talking about ideas. The ideal is that expectations of both parties are met. In the most natural state a woman wants to be a giver, and specifically when she's in her feminine mindset.

I've been in relationships where I had "more power," where the other person had, "more power," and equal relationships. For me, passion was always stronger in equal relationships because there was a stronger bond and more of a desire to maintain such a unique and special connection ("I'm happy and lucky with what I have"). More power/less power relationships were my younger relationships where I didn't know how to pick partners, and neither me nor my partner were secure enough to maintain equality. He had too much power just made me angry and resentful. I had more power made me take him for granted. Neither lasted long after the power imbalance was created.

I think we're talking about two different things.

That's what compatibility is. Compatibility isn't a perfect match, it's finding someone you can live with and stand to be around after chemical infatuation wears off.

Compatibility assumes that person was Compatible from the beginning. It's not something you find, it's something you grow into. And there isn't anyway to know except doing it.

[–]OllieGarkeyBlue Pill1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]OllieGarkeyBlue Pill1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

How would you define value?

Goals and beliefs held by an individual. For example, a belief in the first amendment, opposition to the patriot act, pro choice, etc.

Those are values. Shared values are the foundation of a good relationship.

But TRP talks about sexual market value and other things which are as irritatingly dull as they are incorrect.

There's exchange but hardly every relationship truly has quid pro quo.

To even attempt to calculate quid pro quo in relationships is folly.

Really what TRP are you reading? I think TRP is pretty specific on what a woman should do.

Yes. Exactly. There's no talk about giving from the man's perspective. The woman is the giver. The man is the taker. This parasitic view of manhood is sociopathic.

SO TRP and PUA's always fall for the perfect women?

Perfection is relative to an individual's wants and needs, which will vary. The question isn't whether someone can meet an external set of criteria, it's whether the person meets your individual needs.

That's wholly different from the alpha beta categorization bs talked about by TRP and the PUAs. And also irrelevant to primate behavior, especially those primates that are nearer to humans in social structure, such as Bonobos.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Goals and beliefs held by an individual. For example, a belief in the first amendment, opposition to the patriot act, pro choice, etc. Those are values. Shared values are the foundation of a good relationship. But TRP talks about sexual market value and other things which are as irritatingly dull as they are incorrect.

Where do you think the value of sex comes from?

To even attempt to calculate quid pro quo in relationships is folly.

So people should give freely without expecting anything in return?

Yes. Exactly. There's no talk about giving from the man's perspective. The woman is the giver. The man is the taker. This parasitic view of manhood is sociopathic.

Do you think time is a gift?

The question isn't whether someone can meet an external set of criteria, it's whether the person meets your individual needs.

How are these two ideas mutually exclusive?

That's wholly different from the alpha beta categorization bs talked about by TRP and the PUAs. And also irrelevant to primate behavior, especially those primates that are nearer to humans in social structure, such as Bonobos.

Alphas and beta theories doesn't fully refer to primates. It's an error to think that way. Alpha in TRP an PUA terminology means leaders and followers. There are deeper elements as well, but that's the gist.

[–]OllieGarkeyBlue Pill1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Where do you think the value of sex comes from?

Sexual compatibility is important, but not the foundation of a relationship. It's not even most of what a relationship is for.

The majority of your time with any partner will not be spent in some kind of sexual activity, unless you're engaged in some kind of 24/7 D/s relationship which in some ways sexualizes everything.

So the question of value in sex depends entirely upon the people in the relationship. Does someone like feet? Is someone into kink? Is someone Acey? Do they prefer non-penetrative sex? Do they like having the lights on? Do they want to dress up in costumes and role play?

Finding out what you both value, sexually, is what is important. And considering that each person has a sexuality that is almost as unique as their fingerprint.

So when talking about value and sexuality, one needs to take into account human individuality, rather than trying to put all of us humans with all our weird desires into one perfect, regimented box.

So people should give freely without expecting anything in return?

To one's friends, family, and partner? Yes.

That's not where you start, though, and that's the mistake people make, to be far too trusting with their time, and their friendship. Not everyone is your friend. Some friends you can hang out with and talk with, but you can't lend them money. They're still your friend. You'll give them a lift or buy them lunch, and they'll help you repair your deck when it's damaged by a summer storm. But if you give them money they'll never pay it back, and they'll feel guilty about it, and even if you don't care, it will drive a wedge between the two of you. So you don't give them money.

And then for a very small percentage of the population, there are complete monsters who should never be trusted. Sociopaths, 'objectivists,' and the like who intend to use others without giving anything in return.

You give what you can. Freely, to the people who are your friends, but not stupidly.

I think we should all, as humans, be engaged in making the world a better place simply because we were in it. But that's another discussion.

Do you think time is a gift?

I time is a dimension as well as a measure. What are you asking here exactly?

How are these two ideas mutually exclusive?

If one's willing to subject themselves to external definitions, to give up one's own power of definition and own identity, then yes. But that's for people who want to be told what to do, what to think, what to like, and what to want. That desire for the dominance of others and their ideas is what Leni Riefenstahl called the Submissive Void.

If one is willing to accept external definitions, rather than to define one's own desires, wants, and needs, then yes, the two things might become mutually exclusive.

But for anyone with what psychologists call an internal locus of control, that is, for anyone who thinks that they ultimately control their own lives, and who examines their own life and their own needs, they'll have a much different criteria and set of needs than the list they're handed by outsiders who don't know who they are or what they want.

I find it amusing that TRP promises to free people from such ideas, only to hand people a laundry list of opposing ideas.

TRPs haven't freed themselves from anything. They've simply chosen to believe the opposite of what they've been told.

Rather than looking at the data and making up their own minds, they've again accepted someone else's worldview. Simply because it's a different world view doesn't mean that they've taken the red pill and jumped out of the matrix, as they like to believe about themselves.

Alphas and beta theories doesn't fully refer to primates. It's an error to think that way. Alpha in TRP an PUA terminology means leaders and followers. There are deeper elements as well, but that's the gist.

They were originally designed to refer to wolves, but that research is dated, and modern behavioral zoologists who study wolf packs no longer think in terms of alphas and betas anymore.

It's dated terminology, and makes them all look incredibly foolish.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Sexual compatibility is important, but not the foundation of a relationship. It's not even most of what a relationship is for. The majority of your time with any partner will not be spent in some kind of sexual activity, unless you're engaged in some kind of 24/7 D/s relationship which in some ways sexualizes everything. So the question of value in sex depends entirely upon the people in the relationship. Does someone like feet? Is someone into kink? Is someone Acey? Do they prefer non-penetrative sex? Do they like having the lights on? Do they want to dress up in costumes and role play? Finding out what you both value, sexually, is what is important. And considering that each person has a sexuality that is almost as unique as their fingerprint. So when talking about value and sexuality, one needs to take into account human individuality, rather than trying to put all of us humans with all our weird desires into one perfect, regimented box.

Seems that your problem with RP is that you don't' agree with their classification because you don't want it to apply to you?

And considering that each person has a sexuality that is almost as unique as their fingerprint.

Assuming this is true, then why are you so against RPers telling their women what they want? Cause clearly based on what you see sexuality is dependent on the 2 people involved.

That's not where you start, though, and that's the mistake people make, to be far too trusting with their time, and their friendship

Is this where you diverge from RP theories?

Not everyone is your friend. Some friends you can hang out with and talk with, but you can't lend them money. They're still your friend. You'll give them a lift or buy them lunch, and they'll help you repair your deck when it's damaged by a summer storm. But if you give them money they'll never pay it back, and they'll feel guilty about it, and even if you don't care, it will drive a wedge between the two of you. So you don't give them money.

This is exactly why RP defines the rules of giving, to stave of guilt that can destroy a relationship.

I think we should all, as humans, be engaged in making the world a better place simply because we were in it. But that's another discussion.

Starts with picking the partners that are willing give to you when you give to them.

If one's willing to subject themselves to external definitions, to give up one's own power of definition and own identity, then yes

Is someone requesting this?

But that's for people who want to be told what to do, what to think, what to like, and what to want. That desire for the dominance of others and their ideas is what Leni Riefenstahl called the Submissive Void.

Does this nomenclature help your point? Is there something I'm missing?

If one is willing to accept external definitions, rather than to define one's own desires, wants, and needs, then yes, the two things might become mutually exclusive

Can you create desires for things that you did no know existed?

But for anyone with what psychologists call an internal locus of control, that is, for anyone who thinks that they ultimately control their own lives, and who examines their own life and their own needs, they'll have a much different criteria and set of needs than the list they're handed by outsiders who don't know who they are or what they want.

This assumes people know who they are or are in stasis in life. It's kind of curious that you bring this point up, since it's the antithesis of what a growing relationship should do for you.

I find it amusing that TRP promises to free people from such ideas, only to hand people a laundry list of opposing ideas.

Did you watch the matrix? The red pill just showed Neo that he had the power to affect the world. That's what RP does. It gives men the power, or at least ideas, to control their own destiny. That's the point. Even with the pill Neo still had to do his own work.

Rather than looking at the data and making up their own minds, they've again accepted someone else's worldview. Simply because it's a different world view doesn't mean that they've taken the red pill and jumped out of the matrix, as they like to believe about themselves.

What data are you referring to? And how well does science translate macro data assumption to individual problems?

They were originally designed to refer to wolves, but that research is dated, and modern behavioral zoologists who study wolf packs no longer think in terms of alphas and betas anymore. It's dated terminology, and makes them all look incredibly foolish.

Actually you're a bit inaccurate here. Alpha, beta a way of defining masculinity. Many old psychologist did the same thing. It's a simplification of a concept that is no longer useful in psychology. Not because of it's inaccuracy, because of it's inability to test properly.

Then you give a better term that defines masculine men, and non masculine men that's easy to understand for people?

[–]OllieGarkeyBlue Pill1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Continued from above.

Actually you're a bit inaccurate here. Alpha, beta a way of defining masculinity. Many old psychologist did the same thing. It's simplification of a concept that is no longer useful in psychology. Not because of it's inaccuracy, because of it's inability to test properly. Then you give a better term that defines masculine men, and non masculine men that's easy yo understand for people?

Sure.

Masculinity and maleness have been defined by what they are not, rather than by what they are.

What women and gays do isn't masculine. Everything else is.

So we have this ghettoized view of what a man is allowed to be, and TRP is responding to the uncertainty on the definition of what a man even is.

When people start talking about spectrums, it creates uncertainty and fear. Alpha/Beta concepts are a way to deal with that fear for those who feel insecure. Rather than accepting that they're not Squarejaw McLumberjack,

I completely reject your attempt to define some men as less "masculine" than others.

And I'm saying this as someone who's a giant, bearded Gael who's currently planning a boar hunt. With spears. The problem is, I can't find any good spears. There's this crappy spade thing sold by cold steel that ISN'T a boar spear. I'm going to have to talk to a blacksmith to get the spearheads I need, and that breaks the bank, so our hunt is on hold for the moment.

But just because someone isn't interested in going into the woods with me and spearing a charging hellpig, it doesn't mean that they're less of a man than I am.

My softspoken, gentle Vegan friend who works on computers is just as much of a man as I am, even though he doesn't eat meat, and is definitely uninterested in the boar hunt.

He has decided what he believes, he sticks to it, and he doesn't let himself be told what to think by anyone else.

One of the other guys coming on the boar hunt? He likes knitting.

If you're a male, what you do is by definition, Masculine. If you're hunting boars with spears, or if you're doing crochet, it's a masculine activity, because it's being done by a male.

Masculinity is being used by you as a club to ghettoize men. To say that they're only allowed to do certain things.

And that's easy for me. Because I'm the kind of person who wants to go stab an angry tusked pig to death with a pointed stick, and then roast him over a fire.

But it's harder for my other male friends who don't eat meat, or who like knitting. I fit into the traditional "male" stuff rather comfortably. But that doesn't mean that "people like me" are automatically super masculine.

Men should be allowed to do whatever the fuck they want, and STILL BE MEN. There is nothing that can stop a man from being a man. Men are men. Men are masculine. Full stop.

Some men are outdoorsy. Some men are not. That doesn't make the latter not men, or somehow feminine. And all this talk of more masculine or less masculine is a way to control the behavior of others. Which, frankly, is bullshit, and goes back to my criticism of TRP as a pack of terrified submissives who need rules to obey.

What I'm saying is that any attempt to define men as more male or less male is bullshit unless we're talking about the gender identity spectrum.

[–]OllieGarkeyBlue Pill1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

One of two:

Seems that your problem with RP is that you don't' agree with their classification because you don't want it to apply to you?

Why are you attacking me? You're not calling me names or anything, but you're coming at me with "Your problem, you, you" rather than responding to anything I just wrote.

My problem is "Black Knighting." My problem is rape jokes. My problem is all the negativity you use. My problem is that there's this desire to tear down women that, outside of consentual kink, is completely disgusting.

Assuming this is true, then why are you so against RPers telling their women what they want? Cause clearly based on what you see sexuality is dependent on the 2 people involved.

I have no problem with TRPers telling people what they want. Communication is good.

I have a problem with people being told that everyone is identical and behaves in certain ways. People don't fit neatly into boxes.

It's an ideological problem. TRPers and PUAs have created this box to think in, and everything outside the box is BS to them.

And it's hilarious, to me, honestly. Because they've jumped out of one box into a completely different box, and then announced that they're free from boxes. There's still a framework. And this one is far more damaging than the one they think they've escaped from.

Is this where you diverge from RP theories?

Diverge? That implies that I hold a great deal in common with TRP, which I do not.

This is exactly why RP defines the rules of giving, to stave of guilt that can destroy a relationship

But your rules all speak of this for that, of quid pro quo, rather than establishing a relationship before giving.

That's the rule.

Don't give freely to people you don't have a relationship with yet. When you do have a relationship, then let it happen organically and be honest with your friend about what you want and what you need.

The rest of the rules are unnecessary because each relationship will be different.

I think we should all, as humans, be engaged in making the world a better place simply because we were in it. But that's another discussion.

Starts with picking the partners that are willing give to you when you give to them.

I think that's completely irrelevant. Still, topic for another time and place.

Is someone requesting this? Does this nomenclature help your point? Is there something I'm missing?

Okay, I said:

The question isn't whether someone can meet an external set of criteria, it's whether the person meets your individual needs.

And then you said:

How are these two ideas mutually exclusive?

They are mutually exclusive as long as you're letting others define the world for you. If you let other people define what you want, then the ideas will not be mutually exclusive.

However, if you do some soul searching and figure things out, they'll absolutely be mutually exclusive. Each person needs something different.

If you're trying to fill your needs by letting others define the world for you, and then looking for what you're told you're supposed to want, whether the people telling you are TRP, your parents, your Preacher, or feminists (for the sake of argument), then I hope you find what you need. If you're someone who easily submits to the ideas of others, then this might work for you.

But to those who aren't ideologically submissive, which I would argue is most people, this will never work.

I don't think that making yourself obedient to the ideology of the red pill will help you find what you're looking for. Especially since much of it is based on things that are demonstrably false, or simple, crap, armchair psychology.

That's my point.

Can you create desires for things that you did no know existed?

To the degree that we're the masters of our own wants and desires, absolutely (though that begs the question that we're able to create desires in the first place). We're certainly able to have desires for things we don't know exist, or for things which might not exist at all. We just don't have a word for it in English. In Portuguese it's Saudade. In German it's Sehnsucht.

I know how this feels, myself.

That being said, if you desire to be the dominant force, and power in a relationship? You need to go talk to /r/BDSMcommunity, not /r/TheRedPill.

This assumes people know who they are or are in stasis in life. It's kind of curious that you bring this point up, since it's the antithesis of what a growing relationship should do for you.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Please elaborate for me. I'm beginning to think that despite a common language, we may be completely unable to communicate. The gulfs in our ways of thinking may be unbridgeable.

Did you watch the matrix? The red pill just showed Neo that he had the power to affect the world.

Wrong. It kicked him out of the matrix, and forced him to reject the simulation. I did see the Matrix.

That's what RP does. It gives men the power, or at least ideas, to control their own destiny. That's the point. Even with the pill Neo still had to do his own work.

No it doesn't. It makes them submissive to a very narrow, very limited way of thinking. They don't serve themselves. They serve a set of pernicious and damaging ideas, even to the point of social injury. People lose their friends. Their families. They become pariahs. Because TRP ideas aren't a way for one to control one's self. It's an authoritarian world view that declares that people are X or they are Y. You are an ALPHA. You are a BETA. That is who you ARE. Women should be submissive. They are sluts. They go dancing at clubs because they want to fuck, not because they like dancing. Good/bad. Black/White. Wrong/Right. An absolute worldview, with absolute definitions, that boils everything down so that our complicated, complex world with its uncertainties and its shades of grey becomes less scary.

It's not women that TRPers are afraid of.

It's everything. It's the uncertainty of the world we live in. The grey areas. The change in thinking that is occurring today. The war within religions between the authoritarians and the libertines that is tearing those institutions apart. The divisive politics globally. And as our technology grows and grows the entire world and all of our ideas are in flux, and it's terrifying. It's overwhelming.

And that terror, that fear of everything, the depression, the loneliness, THAT is the submissive void. That is where politicians, preachers, and sociopaths do their work. Amidst the uncertainty and terror of liberty, many people hunger for something to obey. So they find this clique that tells them what to do, how to think.

And rather than standing up and thinking for themselves, they make themselves obedient to a destructive, simplistic philosophy, and then call themselves liberated.

It's sad.

That's what TRP does.

You want links on how TRP makes people Pariahs?

Here:

Liberation?

Far from it.

It's just another variety of authoritarian small-mindedness. It's unhealthy. And it's wrong.

What data are you referring to? And how well does science translate macro data assumption to individual problems?

Hahahahahah. NICE. A tip of the hat to you sir.

You might as well have said: Sure, take an hour to gather your data. But I won't be paying much heed to it because Macro data can't possibly relate to the individual, because outliers.

All right, we'll leave anthropology and sociology out of it if you like.

[–]masterrodPops all pills when necessary. And keeps a heavy stash of RPs.[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why are you attacking me? You're not calling me names or anything, but you're coming at me with "Your problem, you, you" rather than responding to anything I just wrote.

Because I think being very unfair to RPers.

My problem is "Black Knighting." My problem is rape jokes. My problem is all the negativity you use. My problem is that there's this desire to tear down women that, outside of consentual kink, is completely disgusting.

You should say that, instead of just saying the ideas are "wrong". For example, many people loved Bill Clinton but hated his sordid affair with Lewinsky. The distinction is made and his accomplishments are separate, but still tainted. Which I think is a fair assessment. You on the other hand are taking your distaste for certain actions as an indictment of a whole a group of people.

I have a problem with people being told that everyone is identical and behaves in certain ways. People don't fit neatly into boxes.

Depends on a the box. Unfortunately, a large enough box can fit unlimited shapes.

It's an ideological problem. TRPers and PUAs have created this box to think in, and everything outside the box is BS to them.

Isn't that what you're doing right now? I take it you've haven't tried any PUA or TRP tactics.

And it's hilarious, to me, honestly. Because they've jumped out of one box into a completely different box, and then announced that they're free from boxes. There's still a framework. And this one is far more damaging than the one they think they've escaped from.

Well that's the same problem Neo had.

Diverge? That implies that I hold a great deal in common with TRP, which I do not.

I beg to differ.

Don't give freely to people you don't have a relationship with yet. When you do have a relationship, then let it happen organically and be honest with your friend about what you want and what you need.

What do you think in RP relationships? They are inorganic?

The rest of the rules are unnecessary because each relationship will be different.

Unfortunately this isn't true. Relationships are extremely similar, the problem it's hard to know what your partner is perceiving and how everything is changing.

They are mutually exclusive as long as you're letting others define the world for you. If you let other people define what you want, then the ideas will not be mutually exclusive.

Who or what RPers is defining what anyone wants? If you subscribe to a belief you will take it as gar as you can take it, also known as growing up. The world it's defined around us before we enter it. You don't power to define every experience that you're going to have, and it's value. So the world is their to help you fill in the gaps. RP isn't any different from that idea.

However, if you do some soul searching and figure things out, they'll absolutely be mutually exclusive. Each person needs something different

This is a highly faulty belief. We need much of the same things. In truth, there are not that many variations, and if there were we would be utterly fucked.

If you're trying to fill your needs by letting others define the world for you, and then looking for what you're told you're supposed to want, whether the people telling you are TRP, your parents, your Preacher, or feminists (for the sake of argument), then I hope you find what you need. If you're someone who easily submits to the ideas of others, then this might work for you.

People react on pieces not the whole ideas, over time they develop their "own". You must realize in order for the world to be real, you have to accept other people's ideas. Otherwise you will be a crazy person.

But to those who aren't ideologically submissive, which I would argue is most people, this will never work. I don't think that making yourself obedient to the ideology of the red pill will help you find what you're looking for. Especially since much of it is based on things that are demonstrably false, or simple, crap, armchair psychology. That's my point.

You sound like you know something about psychology, but maybe not much about game theory, IDK. IMO, there' s really no such thing as loyalty. And that's a RP stance. Their point is that by being high value, that the loyalty is a consequence. That's a wide concept that doesn't lend it self to the need for obedience. In fact, it implores RPers to develop their own set of values & desires. For example, the definition of the value, or alpha. So consequently, RP framing and understanding is that lure of lady, the love her, isn't a constant. The control a man his relationship is relative to his ability to lead of exhibit have value. You act as if you're diametrically opposed to this idea, but truly you've described value in relationships based on connection. Your real difference is that you think growth should be organic rather than lead.

To the degree that we're the masters of our own wants and desires, absolutely (though that begs the question that we're able to create desires in the first place). We're certainly able to have desires for things we don't know exist, or for things which might not exist at all. We just don't have a word for it in English. In Portuguese it's Saudade. In German it's Sehnsucht. I know how this feels, myself.

No we can't predict what we will feel from things we don't know. We're unable to do that, and it's one reason why many people stick to the status quo.

First of all dominance in RP is more akin to develop passionate relationships. Not some dominance like stringing a lady up her limbs, but dominance in that she feels a strong masculine force next her that she wants to do nothing else but be open to being ravished.

BDSM is categorically different from RP, as you've stated.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Please elaborate for me. I'm beginning to think that despite a common language, we may be completely unable to communicate. The gulfs in our ways of thinking may be unbridgeable.

People grow and never truly know themselves, and is our circumstances and situations help develop our image, but it's most definitely incomplete because of time. limitations

Wrong. It kicked him out of the matrix, and forced him to reject the simulation. I did see the Matrix.

He rejected the simulation but he still had a take on a new journey. He had to liberate the people, and make those outside the matrix believe that he was as powerful as Morpheus said he was. In fact is self realization story. It explains the same journey that RP will take, but the end or the height of the journey is uncertain. As it was for NEO, and all the people out side of the matrix.

No it doesn't. It makes them submissive to a very narrow, very limited way of thinking.

Interesting.. How does RP define a Alpha/SMV exactly? Is it a nebulous concept or is exact? Is there any uncertainty?

. They don't serve themselves. They serve a set of pernicious and damaging ideas, even to the point of social injury. People lose their friends. Their families. They become pariahs. Because TRP ideas aren't a way for one to control one's self. It's an authoritarian world view that declares that people are X or they are Y. You are an ALPHA. You are a BETA. That is who you ARE. Women should be submissive. They are sluts. They go dancing at clubs because they want to fuck, not because they like dancing. Good/bad. Black/White. Wrong/Right. An absolute worldview, with absolute definitions, that boils everything down so that our complicated, complex world with its uncertainties and its shades of grey becomes less scary.

You sound like you want to liberate the RPs. I believe you may want to read more PUA materials, because nothing is as black & white as you think. Your fear is a bit comical. I"m not sure that's serious. Most RP people are talking about getting laid. And agree that in a LTR BP/RP ideas must exist.

It's everything. It's the uncertainty of the world we live in. The grey areas. The change in thinking that is occurring today. The war within religions between the authoritarians and the libertines that is tearing those institutions apart. The divisive politics globally. And as our technology grows and grows the entire world and all of our ideas are in flux, and it's terrifying. It's overwhelming.

Not really true. You can't have a lot of uncertainty when you're trying to bed women, especially women that you do not know.

And that terror, that fear of everything, the depression, the loneliness, THAT is the submissive void. That is where politicians, preachers, and sociopaths do their work. Amidst the uncertainty and terror of liberty, many people hunger for something to obey. So they find this clique that tells them what to do, how to think.

There RPers that would fit this description. However, that's also true of people with broken hearts.

And rather than standing up and thinking for themselves, they make themselves obedient to a destructive, simplistic philosophy, and then call themselves liberated

So how do you sleep with women out side your social circle? How do you reconcile when a lady that you loved but betrayed your trust and is with another man?

It's just another variety of authoritarian small-mindedness. It's unhealthy. And it's wrong.

Do you have a better solution?

Hahahahahah. NICE. A tip of the hat to you sir. You might have well said. Sure, take an hour to gather your data. But I won't be paying much heed to it because Macro data can't possibly relate to the individual, because outliers. All right, we'll leave anthropology and sociology out of it if you like.

Actually it would relatively easy if you were talking data. There are psychologist have done a lot of work in this field can attest verifiable methods of dealing with relationships. You could just presented their work, or their names.

[–]jacks1000-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]jacks1000-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Title	RP is the best damn thing that ever happened to me, and let me tell you why.. [RPW Post]
Author	masterrod
Upvotes	3
Comments	61
Date	May 20, 2014 2:23 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2615lp/rp_is_the_best_damn_thing_that_ever_happened_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/rp-is-the-best-damn-thing-that-ever-happened-to-me.285712 https://theredarchive.com/post/285712

Comments