Hey, I'm new to RPW! As a former radfem the red pill has helped me in relationships, but I'm wondering if any of you ladies mix aspects of the red pill and feminism together and if so, which aspects ?

Willow-girl · 2017-01-02T13:22:16+00:00

I can't be opposed to feminism because I'm older and saw what life is like when women can't get jobs that pay a living wage and are forced to suck up to men in order to survive. It's horrible and I would never want to live the way my mother did.

At the same time, I recognize the limitations of telling people what they "should" do (and want, and feel). I don't think men are naturally domestic and suspect many aren't really inclined toward child-rearing (especially when it comes to very young children). I don't think it makes sense to try to hammer the square peg into the round hole. Sometimes it's better to just accept reality and go with it, IMO.

loadedgunmakeoutsesh · 2017-01-02T16:40:14+00:00

the problem with feminism is that it presumes at a minimum that men and women are equal [third wave goes one step farther and pushes for female superiority under the guise of equality], and therefore, (1) everything must have equal representation between the two genders, and (2) everything that makes men happy should also make women happy. the premise is laughably false. men and women are not equal.

equal representation is a joke... (a) in physical endeavors, the top determinant of success is muscle mass, which is caused by testosterone. by every study, males have 13-20x more testosterone than females. this is why the best women's soccer team in australia got destroyed by a bunch of high school boys, the top 2 females in tennis got demolished by then #203 in mens league back to back with him even taking a smoke break in between, and the NCAA allows women to play football but there's only been 12 ever, almost all kickers. men overall overwhelmingly dominate women in physical activities, and the mean aptitude and skill are not even close. (b) in mental endeavors, the top determinant of success is IQ. while males and females average the same IQ both with normal distributions, females have more clustered around the arithmetic mean than males. when you take the top 1% and bottom 1%, both ends are almost all males. this is why prisons are predominantly male, but virtually all chess grandmasters, fields medalists, tech moguls, and finance gurus are male. and as society continues to specialize and population continues to boom, it's less about the top 1%, and increasingly about the top 0.0001% or even smaller subsections... almost all which are increasingly male. assuming we're talking about prestigious fields, it's only in areas like medicine and law where interpersonal social relations and empathy, where women can have a biological advantage over men, make up for the lost edge in sheer IQ. and finally (c) in all endeavors, the other major predictor of success is perseverance. and in every controlled experiment testing perseverance between genders, testosterone provides a ridiculous advantage... men are chemically far more willing to take risks, far less likely to quit after failure, and far more likely to continue even through self harm, all which drastically raise the likelihood that the top people at <whatever> are males rather than females.

norway and increasingly more progressive euro countries have had spats with quotas for company's board seats, and studies have repeatedly found these quotas (1) drastically reduced the merit-based qualification of average women on boards, (2) reduced the financial performance of these companies [because cutting a talent pool in half on something arbitrary like gender is nonsensical], and (3) it has increased latent discrimination in companies because when most of the women at the top are there because of quotas, not qualifications, most people, including women, will shortcut that to all women there are unqualified. law schools and medical schools have found the same issue with race and gender quotas in admissions... they actually hurt the success rates of both the schools and minorities.

the second issue, of happiness...

American women are wealthier, healthier and better educated than they were 30 years ago. They’re more likely to work outside the home, and more likely to earn salaries comparable to men’s when they do. They can leave abusive marriages and sue sexist employers. They enjoy unprecedented control over their own fertility. On some fronts — graduation rates, life expectancy and even job security — men look increasingly like the second sex.

But all the achievements of the feminist era may have delivered women to greater unhappiness. In the 1960s, when Betty Friedan diagnosed her fellow wives and daughters as the victims of “the problem with no name,” American women reported themselves happier, on average, than did men. Today, that gender gap has reversed. Male happiness has inched up, and female happiness has dropped. In postfeminist America, men are happier than women.

despite all the achievements women are making as a gender, they're only becoming less happy. instead a whopping 84% of women want to be stay-at-home-moms and...

one in three resent their partner for not earning enough to make that dream a reality.

even worse, when it comes to sex, things which make men happy do not necessarily do the same for women. men are the keepers of commitment, women the keepers of sex. men have a biological imperative to fuck as much as possible, and survival of our species has depended on that being enjoyable. it increases the male's genetic line, and because the cost to males even for fucking fatties is so low, men will still fuck fatties to the extent that their time allows. but the sexual liberation of women broke the sexual gender dynamic because men will readily accept sex when women give it away freely. women do not have the biological imperative to fuck as much as possible... and it's actually quite the opposite. a woman is in healthy fertility for roughly 20-30 years, and a full pregnancy takes 9 months. because of healing time after giving birth, it's almost impossible for a single female to have over 15 children. in contrast, ghengis khan had thousands. it is in female interest to be extremely selective of who she fucks because unlike ghengis fucksalot over here, she's only got a few shots. this is why women all go after the same top 20% alpha males and ignore the betas. so nowadays, with women's sexual liberation, women are giving away sex without commitment which destroys female pair bonding, causes alpha widowing, etc. women reach their 30s or later and try to lock down commitment, only to find that alphas ignore them, their fertility is bottom barrel so many betas don't even want them anymore, and their sex has become commoditized. the classic redpill story unfolds, she's been alpha widowed, and she's practically guaranteed to get divorced or chronically depressed (or both).

and finally, feminism has given rise to no-fault divorce, which has become a societal backbreaker that's causing drastic rises in chronic depression in women. men understand that divorce laws are not in our favor and marriage now fails the cost-benefits analysis. combined with information becoming readily available via the internet, in only 2 generations, the marriage rate has gone into freefall. prior generations had reached 80% marriage by 35 or earlier, but 80s babies have already leveled off with 60% married, and 90s babies have leveled off at only 20% married. if you're not already married, you're either a teenager or younger, or it's extremely unlikely you will ever be married. and in post-feminist america, this lack of marriage means (1) a woman doesn't get her nuclear family so the 84% who want to be SAHMs are totally denied that desire, and (2) she's stuck competing directly against both other females on their level and men who have a significant biological advantage. this is why a quarter of women in the US are now chronically depressed, popping antidepressants like candy (men are ~10% and much of that is from war injuries and catastrophic accidents).

TLDR: feminism is cancer.

the point of RPW is to understand and take advantage of gender differences, so that you do not get victimized by abusive men, fuckboys who won't commit, or the lies of feminism which permanently damage women's lives.

ButThatDidntHelp · 2017-01-02T12:38:26+00:00

Welcome to RPW. I'll try to briefly explain the anti-feminism that you will see here without getting long-winded about it.

But I still don't feel the hate for feminists that I've seen in this thread and I was wondering why there is so much hate.

Second-wave feminism was over by 1990, and we are now in third-wave or intersectional feminism, which is what is primarily demonized in RP circles. It promotes a lot of misinformation that hurts both men and women.

Feminism (mostly second wave ) even helped save me from suicide and opened the doors for me to WANT to learn how to value myself and other women for more than just their looks by working on my character, my education, my health and mental fortitude and even taught me how to stand up for myself.

There are a lot of different things that have done this for a lot of different women. I'm glad you found what worked for you in that regard.

I got into controlling relationships/had a lot of uncommitted sexual partners early on with sketchy characters because I was naive and thought it would make me happy.

One of the many issues that RP circles have with third-wave feminism is that it promotes this type of behavior as far as women going around having sex all willy nilly.

Another issue that RP circles have with third-wave feminism is that it is not about equality at all; it is inherently pro-woman, but only for certain women.

Overall, the issue is that third-wave feminism is a massive net loss for society and the people in it. I'm not interested in debating it with you (or anyone else), but I'm almost certain that the second-wave vs. third-wave issue is the primary hang-up for you.

Happy New Year and best of luck.

scary_canary · 2017-01-02T17:23:28+00:00

I jokingly call myself an "international feminist", by which I mean I believe there are many countries that do desperately need a dose of feminism. I think men and women should have equal rights in the eyes of the law and equal protections within their communities (yes, I am aware that that's never 100% the case). I think if women want to identify as feminists they should focus their attention on women living in countries where they are literally treated as property and have very few rights.

I know, I know, it's HUMAN rights why does it have to be about feminism??!!? It has to be about feminism because in these countries the treatment of women is justified by ideologies that firmly state the subservience and inequality of women compared to men. If a country was massively abusing one race, or people over a certain height, or anyone with straight hair, the way to combat that would be to promote ideas of equality regarding that group.

Ironically, I do not fit into modern day American feminism, because it's really not about equal rights anymore. Modern day feminism is about constantly reporting micro-aggressions and saying that "gender is a social construct" and women getting to treat men basically however they want and ignoring all data that shows how different men and women are. It's about making yourself out to be some victimized third-class citizen when you're not. Basically, it's whining and being a delicate special snowflake while stomping around and shit talking men. I'm not into that, I'm into human rights, and I believe that in some cases old school feminism can help promote human rights.

currant_scone · 2017-01-02T17:15:49+00:00

Not necessarily RPW certified, but I'll give you my take on the discussion. Most people here wouldn't disagree with "feminism" in in the sense of encouraging female empowerment (equal pay, equal representation in management positions, etc) or celebrating self-love and self worth. But modern feminism seems to equate "being powerful" with "being masculine" in style (shirking makeup or looking "girly"), sexual approach (having multiple partners; treating sex casually), being overall demeanor.

Personally, I think that most women have masculine and feminine attributes, and learning when and where to harness those efficiently can bring you success in your relationships. My masculine side, the part that wants to control things, to "fix" things, etc, works beautifully when I harness it to further myself in my career, but I try to keep it out of my relationship. Additionally, I try to celebrate my feminine nature, and enjoy the simple art that is being a woman. Men seem to appreciate women more for the feminine attributes they bring to a relationship, like creating a soft, attractive, safe space for them to be themselves, rather than their social or career achievements.

Banincoming · 2017-01-02T14:42:42+00:00

Much of the "hate" comes from feminism pushing non-monogamous sex as "empowerment".

kelpieballs · 2017-01-02T11:51:07+00:00

Curious, how exactly do you think feminism helped you? The way I see it, you don't need it to find value in yourself and/or other human beings; feminism does not own these concepts.

Mentathiel · 2017-01-02T13:49:57+00:00

Feminism is not equivalent to female empowerment and emancipations. You might like an outcome to an extent, but not like the way it way achieved. And feminism is a wast movement full of different people. I think sum total of what they did, especially third wave, is downright evil, but that doesn't mean every part of it or person within it is or that it can't have enormous positive influence as well.

That being said, I don't have the mental energy right now to get into why I so strongly dislike them. In short, they're convincing people around me that they're victims of societal oppression that they have no power against and that they should just give up all responsibility. And they're making them miserable through stupid propaganda in order to keep them powerless enough for this illusion to be maintained or for whichever reason, but that's the end result anyway.

scary_canary · 2017-01-02T20:21:01+00:00

I am a woman who wears many faces and fits in in many places.

I originally went to TRP to research and prove it wrong as an ideology and a theory at face value and was unable to do so. It is pretty sound in all of its subjects (sociology, psychology, biology, chemistry, etc).

The "hate" for contemporary feminism is that it in itself is a flawed ideology that pushes false agendas. This affects the men more than us because the structure of contemporary feminism has sort of taken their agency away when choosing mates. The Red Pill kind of acts like a tool set to require that agency so they feel bitter that they have been subject to the structure.

I don't wear my Red Pill face unless it benefits me! This means when I go to school among my peers who I don't care about I look sloppy. I don't brush my hair sometimes, I don't keep my place clean, I swear a lot, etc. I do a lot of things that contradict the red pill because it is a theory I don't always need.

I'm down for discussing things between both the ideologies!

[deleted] · 2017-01-02T20:32:05+00:00

I'm a feminist, in the sense that I believe that women should have equal rights, that we benefit from having a more equal representation with women in politics, that women should be encouraged to develop their talents and interests in any field they choose. I also think it's better for a woman to work than to be a housewife.

I don't like 3rd (or 4th?) wave feminism, because of its emphasis on pop culture, its belief we live in a rape culture, the internet mob like mentality, the belief that there are no general biological differences, the general tone, the fact that it tells women that they (should) enjoy casual sex as much as men.

Moobx · 2017-01-03T03:14:03+00:00

if feminism was useful in the present for modern women (in u.s. at least), especially in landing the type of man they want, then u wouldnt be here.

TheBunk_TB · 2017-01-02T16:54:39+00:00

You also have a somewhat positive outlook. Were you a fan of Wendy McElroy? (It also seems that you didn't consume the intersectionalism like many of feminists did).

[deleted] · 2017-01-05T06:00:01+00:00

I'm going to throw in historical context for the philosophy already mentioned in this thread.

1964: Civil Rights Act. This was a big one, though not entirely relevant to the conversation of feminism vs. RPW ideology.

1973 (Roe vs. Wade): A legal decision by the Supreme Court on the availability of abortion.

1975 (This was the big one): Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Gave women the right to secure loans individually that were not backed by their husband or father. Previously, discrimination in lending was primarily based on a woman's income not being counted equal as reported, if they would be having kids, etc.

Actually, here's a good PDF explaining the history.

http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/WomensRightstimeline.pdf

xelaandra23 · 2017-01-09T09:55:35+00:00

I think in some ways I resemble a feminist even though I don't consider myself one. I'll tell you a bit about me so you can decide for yourself whether I sound like a RPW. I'm probably some kind of fusion of feminist and RPW, although I hate thinking of myself as a feminist in any way. :)

I graduated with a bachelors degree from a top university and subsequently attended and graduated from law school.

I'm 26 and currently single. I want to establish myself in my career before settling down. I'm currently working on establishing myself at least a bit before I get serious with a guy.

I think my mindset is very RP, but on the surface it appears I'm not. My view on why I haven't settled down yet is the world is so different today than it was for our parents and especially grandparents and great-grandparents - for many, it isn't practical to settle down at 18-20 anymore and become homemakers. Life is easier, people live longer, education is easier to obtain, etc. As a result, I think it's fine for a woman to explore during her twenties and get to know herself, establish a career, etc., and then settle down around 30. I don't think it's necessary to stay home full-time once you have kids either because of all the conveniences we have today.

That being said, I don't plan to work full-time once I have kids (at least not while they're young) and I'd definitely like my husband to be the breadwinner. One reason I'm working so hard in my twenties is so that I can be at a place in my career such that I can get a great part-time job doing something that I love (and that pays a decent amount/holds some prestige) down the road.

I do date kind of a lot, as well, and don't settle down with any of the guys. However, I don't have sex with any of them. I go on dates and get to know guys for the fun of it even though I don't want to settle down (or at least haven't during most of my twenties), but because I don't have sex I don't consider myself a slut.

Now that I'm 26 (almost 26.5) and almost two years out of school, however, I am focusing more on finding a guy to settle down with. My goal is to have kids around 30 or in my early 30s. Gotta get that career in place first, though.

Comments