~ archived since 2018 ~

My view on the red pill

Noonewillknowme

March 5, 2013

1 upvotes

Archived from /r/TheRedPill

r/TheRedPill is a subreddit for discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/TheRedPill archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	My view on the red pill
Author	Noonewillknowme
Upvotes	1
Comments	19
Date	March 5, 2013 6:32 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/19ozrs/my_view_on_the_red_pill/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/my-view-on-the-red-pill.3616 https://theredarchive.com/post/3616

Comments

[–]RedSunBlue 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedSunBlue 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Your feelings, or mine, have nothing to do with the goal of this subreddit. Ideally, we deal with truths which are supported by science, ugly though they might seem. I doubt you have anything to go on besides your feelings, but if you have any (non-anecdotal) evidence that disproves the beliefs in this subreddit regarding the behavior of women go ahead and post it.

If you "feel" the information being bandied about in this subreddit is false why don't you take up a debate with the moderator and prove us wrong?

one more, because these are fun:

Red Pill: "People have a dominant hand which they use for writing"

You: "I take offense to that being ambidextrous myself, and yea i realize it's a minority but it's just started to grow and lumping handedness into these two sides is detrimental to people exploring how they really feel about themselves. They act either one way or another, because that's what everyone else does."

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RedSunBlue -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course there are exceptions to the rule. The exceptions do not invalidate the rules. In fact, they often prove the rules. And that is what we are interested in here at /r/TheRedPill. Nobody feels the need to preface every statement made here with "Not all women are like this but" because it is understood by anyone with a solid understanding of biology and behavioral psychology. Moreover, we are not interested in sexual interactions with the a large portion of the exceptions as you define them, e.g., transgenders, gays, lesbians, furries, etc.

For you to come in here and demonize us for not considering that which we are not interested in is incredibly solipsistic and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the goals of this subreddit.

Last one, I promise:

If you told someone, "Humans have two arms and two legs." and s/he replied:

This seems like it's blatant over-generalization, assuming this is how every single human is. Not to mention the fact that you are completely ignoring the fact that THERE'S AMPUTEES.

You'd immediately stop talking to this person.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Women are perfectly capable of using logic, sure, I don't think anybody here disagrees. I think I kind of get what you are trying to say now, you are saying that it is not possibly to know about women, because "women" and "men" are ill defined terms as gender is a "spectrum" as you put it.

The entire point of this sub is based on a few things. Genders have different sexual strategies. 1) Men's sexual strategy is that we want young, tight, sexy ladies. bang as many as possible to spread our genes. Any deviation from this is selected against (they don't breed or breed inferior people over the long term). 2) Women's sexual strategy, in its natural state, is hypergamy. This applies to attractive females mostly, as they have the greatest sexual value to "trade". Basically women are attracted to power/status, and women trade up if they can. "UP" does not have to mean literally up in status, but up in genetics (having an affair with a sexy alpha guy while cuckolding her husband)

3) In order for men to be successful, they need to be a natural alpha male, or have "game". Game basically play's to womens sexual strategy, make yourself look like an alpha. "BE" alpha. Game is how we achieve our sexual strategy, as young, tight women generally don't give it out to just anybody, but the strongest.

In your original post, you say that it is too over encompassing. you feel like we all have 100% agency, and make all our decisions consciously. I think that is a flawed assumption, we are effected by hormones all the time. does that mean we have to give into them? No. Women have curbed their hypergamous nature by social condition in the past, and indeed there is still social conditioning to this nature (slut shaming, pressure to be monogamous)

Maybe you find this all too hard to swallow as you are interested in men as opposed to women?

I'd be glad to talk more if you want, questions away!

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes, ok, I totally get the sexual strategies and attraction part of what this subreddit is about. And the strategies discussed do work, I can provide myself as an example of that. The only problem I found and made me loose a lot of respect for this community and it's users is the view that women are not equal to men. An example would be this post specifically what's said in the 4th red part down of the 4chan post. He says he could never trust a woman to be loyal or vote for one to be president. I'm assuming he means to say it's possible for a woman to be loyal but would never bet on it. That's the over generalization I see, and most of the comments I saw on this post were not negative towards it, so I have to assume they agree with it. Although it seemed like someone addressed that they were inferior and were corrected, but the comment was deleted.

It just seems from my experience of this subreddit so far that some of the users are taking the information the wrong way and are not respecting women as intelligent humans.

Edit: as I side note, I'm not interested in men as opposed to women, I'm interested in people, idk if you're familiar with the term pansexual but I would describe myself with that.

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I mean I guess I was talking about respecting women outside of the bedroom, or wherever. Like realizing that they are something more than just a sexual object, they can be your peer, subordinate or superior. Even if they are attractive, to you or otherwise, or they themselves are attracted to you, the most important thing should not always be how get them to fuck you. It just seems that this idea of manipulation and overpowering mentally is seeping into other aspects of life, past simply sexual things.

Also, why wouldn't loyalty be bad for a man in that situation? If his wife died and he stayed loyal to her, no more offspring from him. In fact loyalty seems like the opposite of what would be good for a man trying to spread his seed as much as possible. It takes women 9 months to make a baby, if the man was sitting around with that same woman the whole time, he wouldn't be able to make more offspring. It makes more sense for him to fuck as many women as possible. That is not loyalty. If you're looking through the lens of natural selection and evolution, I think you guys have it backwards.

[–]Endorsed ContributorSarcasticus 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Noonewillknowme[S] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link