[–]AssistTemporary8422 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

[+]AirForceNerd[S] -29 points-28 points-27 points 3 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

All of them really. To me it is a science. It's a theory.

For me, hearing about hypergamy makes sense to me and inspires no hatred towards women, just a better understanding. I think most people hear about hypergamy and use it as a cop out to hate on women and call them hoes or sluts or whatever other insult.

I think for the vast majority of people, I think the latter is what their red pill experience is like. I really feel like this is driven by figures in the manosphere who feed off of hurt and insecure men. Saying outlandish statements puts more eyes on them and more money in their wallet. Once you strip away all the bias and controversial statements, the information is solid and rational. It's a wide scale Ad hominem fallacy, and rightfully so.

The entirety of red pill basically says "You are the reason for your success or lack of success. Do not blame others. Take accountability for your life. Start living for yourself and start putting yourself first. Work on your shit." and it sucks that a lot of people just see red pill as nothing more then men hating on women. It's really just men teaching each other how to be men.

[–]SweelFor- 37 points38 points39 points 3 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

To me it is a science. It's a theory.

It is not. Red pill is a theory of psychology. 0% of psychologists use red pill as a model of psychology. 100% of people who hold red pill as a valid theory of psychology, are not psychologists.

It's only valid to those who aren't experts of the subject, and it's not valid to all of those who are.

The entirety of red pill basically says "You are the reason for your success or lack of success. Do not blame others. Take accountability for your life. Start living for yourself and start putting yourself first. Work on your shit."

How strange that you need red pill for this. You are denying that red pill has a gender component at all, which is obviously arguing in very bad faith. If 99% of red pillers use it in relation to gender questions, then red pill is about gender questions.

Your interpretation is the most vanilla self improvement quote.

It's like saying that you like tomatoes, so you're trying to pick tomatoes from a disgusting rotten sandwich full of shit and saying "this is a tomato". No: it is a disgusting sandwich and you should find your basic tomatoes elsewhere.

Go to the fresh tomatoes stand, and stop weirdly trying to pick appart a rotten sandwich to find the one fresh tomato lost in there.

[+]AirForceNerd[S] -23 points-22 points-21 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Red pill is not a theory of psychology, it is a theory of inter gender dynamics. It is heavily focused on sex and on genders.

The theory states what is observed, there is quite a bit of history that can be found to explain why red pill looks the way it does now, the community dates back to the late 90s.

The conclusion that most red pillers come to after digesting the theory is that you need to take accountability for yourself and your results. Make yourself your primary focus and stop putting others before you your wants and needs.

That doesn't mean be a dick, it just means know how to have boundaries, know what your boundaries are, and have a back bone.

A great example is cuckoldry. If a red pill man wants to be a cuck, he should do so with no shame and he should expect to get shit from other men about it, but that man becomes a worse version of himself when he lets fear of rejection dictate his actions and in turn, suppress his own desires.

[–]SweelFor- 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Red pill is not a theory of psychology, it is a theory of inter gender dynamics. It is heavily focused on sex and on genders.

Interpersonal relations are a matter of psychology. You are saying "it's not about mathematics, it's about how numbers add up".

I understand that you don't know psychology so this might not be obvious to you. But I'm telling you: it is obvious.

The conclusion that most red pillers come to after digesting the theory is that you need to take accountability for yourself and your results

How strange. A million self improvement books could have told you this, without any mention of the red pill model.

Your strange denial that red pill isn't really about gender, it's about the most basic vanilla self improvement principle in all of humanity, is completely pointless.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and squacks like a duck, then it's a duck.

[+]AirForceNerd[S] -10 points-9 points-8 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor- 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]AirForceNerd[S] -6 points-5 points-4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thrownawaytodaysr 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]liveultimate 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]liveultimate 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

I can see where you're coming from, and from my perspective, it sounds like you only looked at a fraction of red pill. The most surface level lessons of red pill are often taken to extremes, a lot of manosphere youtubers are prime examples of that.

It goes a lot deeper than teaching struggling men about women. And to be honest, I think the married red pill subreddit is a great example of that. The community there seemed to be much more grounded in reality and mature than just the standard red pill sub.

Another question though, do you think there is any truth to red pill? I only ask because it seems statistically improbable for so many men to come to the same conclusion and to have that conclusion contain 0 logic or truth. So many men in fact, that an entire blue print and culture have been derived from those conclusions.

Are they all wrong? Or is that information just presented in a way that seems bigoted?

[–]liveultimate 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

I haven’t looked at the married red pill sub, so idk what they say, but it’s all about how you treat others. What if you were in a relationship with a girl and she was worried that you would cheat on her because “all men just want to spread their seed”? She wouldn’t be looking at you as an individual, but men as a whole. That’s not a very nice thing to say is it? Same with men saying women are hypergamous etc

I don’t think there is “truth” to red pill. I think some of the advice can be good, like improving yourself, going to the gym, etc but that’s not “red pill” that’s just life advice. But all of red pill is opinion based, not fact as they claim.

The reason you think that most guys share the same conclusions is because you’re looking at an echo chamber of red pill men. What about all the people on this sub?

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Well frankly coming to this sub, I agreed with a lot of the things I saw. Quite a few posts left me scratching my head and saying "how is this anti red pill?"

I would also have to suppose you'd be right on red pill being opinion based and not fact based. Red pill will forever be a theory, but the history of it is fascinating. Up until covid, (since the late 90's) it's always been men sharing notes and collectively testing those notes when out trying to pick up women or within their relationships. Some ideas stuck, some didn't. More notes were taken and more ideas were tested.

Today, red pill is just the culmination of those notes, but I suppose it'd be impossible to prove any of it as fact, and thus, it's always just been a theory.

The advice given has drastically changed as decades have gone by as well. If you are really interested, read "The Game" by Neil Struass for a glimpse into the very early days of red pill. Men used to be told told to memorize lines and repeat them, and this surprisingly worked up until they ran out of lines to say. Realizing this was a problem, the community shifted towards teaching men what their problems were and how to fix them, which is where a lot of modern day general life advice comes from.

I think the biggest thing people don't realize though, is that red pill doesn't teach you how to have healthy and secure relationships, it teaches you how to have more sex. And although there is over lap, those things are vastly different and require a different mindset and skillset. Red pill gets you laid, blue pill gets you settled.

[–]liveultimate 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]liveultimate1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This post from 6 month ago was the very first thing I posted on a red pill sub. In it, I used the word "bitches" and the community was quick to call me out on that. They disapproved of my use of that word, called me hateful and disrespectful, that I needed to grow up, and that I didn't really understand red pill.

6 months ago, I did not understand red pill, they were right. I still have a shit ton of learning to do.

All the comments basically told me, in more words or less, do more research, work on yourself, stop needing other people to decide who you are. This was also married red pill, not the standard sub.

I assume most men took a similar stance as my own when first discovering the red pill. A misinterpretation of the theory and a slew of toxic masculinity.

I won't cite any more sources, but I did so to say, my experience with the community has never been that of one centered around hatred and manipulation of women. It's always been about owning your shit and learning how to live your own life, not the life you think you need to live. It's been nothing but positive masculinity, which is something a lot of men, myself included, never really had growing up.

Regardless, think of red pill as you will, end of the day you found something that works better for you, and that's all that really matters.

[–]liveultimate1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Don’t beat yourself up. You weren’t “beta” or getting “oneitis”, you were human. A real, honest, person or friend would help you through this and not just basically say “man the fuck up.”

It sounds like you found a real connection with someone but you were struggling with some things and one of it is probably the fact that you wanted to practice red pill.

Trust me man, it seems like you’re a genuine person, but you’ve fallen into the depths of red pill and I hope you can climb out. It will be hard, especially if you’ve had your heart broken by a girl in the past. I’ve seen this countless times.

You can still be your own person and continue to make your own choices. In fact, I think this is solid advice. But you don’t have to be red pill to do so.

Take a look at the wiki on this sub. Report back when you’ve dropped red pill completely. You will be much happier if you do, but again, only you can come to that conclusion

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I won't cite any more sources, but I did so to say, my experience with the community has never been that of one centered around hatred and manipulation of women. It's always been about owning your shit and learning how to live your own life, not the life you think you need to live. It's been nothing but positive masculinity

Okay, then I'll cite sources.

Here's one of the most prominent pages linked on the official TheRedPill sidebar. A Red Pill-themed e-book called The Manipulated Man:

WHAT IS WOMAN? [A woman is] a human being who does not work [...] Women do not use their mental capacity: they deliberately let it disintegrate. After a few years of sporadic training, they revert to a state of irreversible mental torpor [..] Theoretically it is possible for a beautiful woman to have less intelligence than a chimpanzee and still be considered an acceptable member of society.

By the age of twelve at the latest, most women have decided to become prostitutes. Or, to put it another way they have planned a future for themselves which consists of choosing a man and letting him do all the work [in return for which the man receives] use of their vagina at certain given intervals.

One of man's worst mistakes [is to] assume that woman is his equal [..] Men seem incapable of realizing that women entirely lack ambition, desire for knowledge and need to prove themselves [..] Without any emotion - love, hate, or malice - she is bound to the man who works for her. [..]

What, besides money, can bind a woman to a man? Women make ideal living companions for each other. Their feelings and instincts are retarded at the same primitive level [Man] has intelligence as well as beauty.[..] The mere fact that [women] are so much less intelligent than men is enough to contradict such a conception, for a stupid person can never be thought of as beautiful unless judged on the purely physical level. But it should be emphasized that the fault lies with man himself, who valued women according to standards by which people and animals are on the same level. If he had not done so, women would hardly fit into the group Homo sapiens.

Woman's greatest ideal is a life without work or responsibility - yet who leads such a life but a child? A child with appealing eyes, a funny little body with dimples and sweet layers of baby fat and clear, taut skin - that darling miniature of an adult. [..]

A woman with feelings would have to think and work[..] Still, as her emotions are always faked and never felt, she can keep a clear head. You can take advantage of someone's feelings only if you are not involved yourself. Therefore, she turns her partner's emotions to her own profit

That's not some "obscure" TRP comment from some raving loon. That's standard TRP doctrine they encourage you to read to understand women and men:

Women, according to TRP, are stupid, manipulative babies, incapable of anything except coldly pitting men against their own insecurities, to keep them desperately providing for their wives and girlfriends, who should *literally be considered a sub-species of homo sapiens at best**, but men are just too sweet and kind to label them as such.

Fuck the red pill and its "scientific" approach. It's a desperate, hateful pile of steaming dogshit for insecure losers who are so scared of women and their own failed potential, they'll invent what borders on an entire religion of cock worship instead of face their own demons.

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Anything taken out of context can be made to sound awful. But yes, I agree, that does sound awful and incredibly hateful. Even with full knowledge of the source in question, I'd still agree that the author could get the same point across with less shock value.

All of that being said, there is truth in that article, and it reflects heavily on ones intelligence and character to take anything at face value and not question it. A lot of men cannot make that discretion. For as advanced of a species that we are, we are still incredibly dumb. I can only imagine how many men have read that and took every single word to heart.

The intention of the article is not to inspire hatred, but to shed light on topics concerning both genders that is far to taboo to even consider looking into, less you be shunned.

The main goal with including that on the side bar is to help men take women off of a pedestal. Nonetheless, I still agree, it does sound awful, and it will absolutely inspire hatred of women in men who cannot read between the lines.

And for a lot of men, hatred and disapproval of women is a phase they encounter when first being introduced to red pill. It passes. It's in the same vein of how most of us had a phase where we distanced ourselves from our parents and resented them as teenagers. It passes.

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The intention of the article is not to inspire hatred, but to shed light on topics concerning both genders that is far to taboo to even consider looking into, less you be shunned.

So calling women so stupid and manipulative they should be considered a dangerous sub-species is “taboo” knowledge that is just too dangerous for some people to handle with maturity?

The main goal with including that on the side bar is to help men take women off of a pedestal. Nonetheless, I still agree, it does sound awful, and it will absolutely inspire hatred of women in men who cannot read between the lines.

Read between the lines?

What the hell does it even matter whether it results in hatred, when it’s literally saying that if you enter into a relationship with a woman believing she’s a three dimensional person with dreams and insights and morality on par with yours, then you’re deluding yourself, and you’d better wise up before this cold-hearted lizard-brain-only predator destroys your life?

You seriously think not hating gets you off the hook for endorsing that garbage, and recommending men study it?

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, it is taboo to discuss the differences of the two genders. To say anything besides "we are equals" is demonized. We are not equals, and I'd like to make my stance on that clear. In fact, not a single person can ever be equal to another, regardless of gender. Everyone is different. We are all equitable however, and that is true regardless of gender.

Getting into the taboo subject though, we can say that humans who have been exposed to higher levels of testosterone will develop traits relative to the amount they were exposed to. This exposure makes you more self centered, more psychopathic (less empathy, and a harder time connecting with other people), and it gives you a desire to control or dominate. Most "masculine" traits are derived from the impact testosterone plays on a man's psychology. And yes, that man would be foolish to assume that women's brains work the same, which he has been taught to believe.

Women are exposed to much less testosterone than men are, and therefore have a wildly different psychology. This does not make them subordinate, although many red pillers will pedal that, it does however mean they think very different as opposed to men. I haven't really studied all of the effects that estrogen has on the mind, so I'll take a shot in the dark and say that estrogen tends to make people more emotional, more empathetic, and a desire to embrace their situation, not control it. If I am wrong, please correct me.

To say a man is more rational and a woman is more emotional is taboo, but it's supported by biology and psychology. I'd also like to note, that man or woman can emanate either masculine or feminine traits at any given time, however, an individual usually has a preference. A man can be emotional and a woman can be rational, but they probably exhibit one trait far more often than the other.

The LGTBQ community is well aware that your sex does not define your gender, they are also aware that for a healthy and sexually active relationship, polarity is needed. There is a top and a bottom, a dom and a sub, a mas and a fem.

It does not matter if the man is feminine or if the woman is masculine, if the two switch every day or if they never switch, but in order to maintain attraction and lust within a relationship, the two must remain polarized. Else they become buddies who occasionally rub genitals together.

Red pill assumes men would like to play the masculine pole, and teaches them how to do that. It also assumed that that same man would like a feminine woman, and teaches him (in choice words) what that looks like and what to expect.

But, to say that men should be masculine and women should be feminine (in order for a healthy and sexually active relationship) is taboo. Telling women to be submissive is misogynist and goes against the feminist movement. (Ironically, the feminist movement has had the effect of making women more masculine and men more feminine, resulting in the lowest satisfaction within our love life's to date. We are closer to equals than ever before, and satisfaction within relationships has never been lower. There are plenty of studies supporting that claim.) And telling men to be masculine is toxic and also goes against the feminist movement.

Again, the LGTBQ community is well aware that there needs to be some masculine and feminine polarity for a healthy relationship. But to bring that idea into heterosexual relationships is not socially acceptable and must mean that you hate women. Red pill is nothing but observations, sometimes those observations are expressed in far too extreme a way, but they are done so to help men understand. Red pill is not about hatred, it is about finding a successful love life. In order to do that, men and women should not be seen as equals. Equitable? Yes. But equals? No.

To see a woman as equal to you is a mistake for a man who wants to make that woman and himself feel loved. The closer to equal they become, the more the relationship steers away from passionate romance and the closer it steers towards friendship. Again, both parties would rather prefer passionate romance over a friendship, and that requires polarity.

Everything I've said can also be found on the side bar.

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So, to summarize, you believe:

Half the human population is fundamentally wired to be without empathy, dangerous, and to pose, by far, the biggest threat to the happiness and wellbeing of the other half, and unfortunately, it falls to women to break this cycle of enslavement.
Gender doesn't necessarily limit a person to be whatever they want to be.
Male decision-making is biased in favor of rationality over emotion, and for women, it's the opposite.
LGBTQ+ people have demonstrated that a dom/sub or at least leader/follower dynamic has natural advantages in a relationship, though it's often advantages to employ this in a "fluid" manner, depending on context.
Anything that seems hateful or overly aggressive about TRP is about "waking men up" and inspiring them to take back their masculine autonomy, and shouldn't seriously be construed as endorsement of abusive behavior.

Is that about right?

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 2 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No. Half the population is wired to have less empathy, not to be entirely incapable of it. This is a fact. I stated nothing about danger nor threats towards happiness. Just a desire for men feel capable and in control of the things they find important.

Control and dominance is not bad by default. Bad things can be done with those things, certainly, but that does not make those traits/ desires bad. Good things can be done through control and dominance, but that does not make those traits/ desires good. They are simply things that the male mind gravitates towards, the individual is responsible for what that desire results in.

Yes, gender does not limit anybody on achieving anything.
Yes, men tend to make decisions based off rationality where as women tend to make decisions based off of what feels right. This is of course is just a trend, and there is no reason to believe women are incapable of rational thinking and men are incapable of following what feels best.
Yes. The LGBTQ community openly embraces and understands the role that polarity plays within a romantic relationship. And this polarity is fluid, however, individuals tend to have a preference on which role they would like to play. Often times, the sex of that individual heavily contributes to the role they have preference for.
Somewhat. The purpose of the exaggeration is to help "wake men up" and reclaim their masculinity. But that does not make it free of criticism. Personally, I think a lot of that shit should be toned down, but nonetheless, I understand why it isn't. It gets eyes on the theory and people in the community, especially men who have just suffered a recent heart break or trauma surrounding women.

Either way, it is valid to criticize red pill for their extremist views, but it is invalid to assume that's all there is to the community.

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 2 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Somewhat. The purpose of the exaggeration is to help "wake men up" and reclaim their masculinity. But that does not make it free of criticism. Personally, I think a lot of that shit should be toned down, but nonetheless, I understand why it isn't. It gets eyes on the theory and people in the community, especially men who have just suffered a recent heart break or trauma surrounding women.

What, specifically, would you "tone down"? If you care about this so much, which aspects do you think are "over the top"? And are they factually wrong?

Take "Dread Game"", for example:

She knows she's replaceable. She knows you actually most likely are out fucking other women, even when you fraudulently assure her you're not, with a grin on your face. She will hate and desire you simultaneously. Your indifference will drive her fucking mental. She will give you her body as both a token of her appreciation for understanding her primal needs, and as a desperate attempt to reel you in and secure you, in order to fulfill her imperative which is to beta-ize you and move on to the next male.

Having this mindset has personally manifested in these behaviors of mine with my plates and STR's;

Regularly ignore phone calls (I simply don't care)

Regularly disappear for days on end (I don't need to explain anything)

Regularly fuck, speak to and flirt with other women (I am a man)

Constantly trivialize emotional discussion/shit tests (I don't care because I'm not invested nor operating within a female frame)

Call her out on her shit, tell her she's wrong, argue with her for the sake of it (drama injection, create fights for the fun of it)

Instigate pointless fights (bored, enjoy seeing her hamster)

Act completely indifferent/disinterested in person (am usually disinterested outside of bedroom anyway)

Occasionally reject sex (nuclear, advanced level and only to be used sparingly)

I balance these natural behaviors with forced, fraudulent and acted necessary comfort such as;

Spontaneous, almost psychotic declarations of desire

Listening to her problems and pretending to care

Ridiculous, over the top compliments

Fucking her to the best of my ability

Pretending she is unique/special

Periodically entertaining the idea of becoming exclusive

The only notable "disapproval" here was from one guy who everyone concluded was unwittingly running "natural dread" because he was just that alpha.

Help me understand how to "read between the lines" here. Should I:

Regard this as satire, and I'm just not getting the joke?
Disregard this as an example of "too extreme" Red Pill that crosses the line into abuse, which you'd like to see the community officially denounce it, despite it being plainly endorsed in the all-in-one guide?
Just swallow the Red Pill, un-Beta-ize myself, and accept that every woman I've ever loved has secretly seen me as a replaceable stepping stone, fucked me passionately only out of a desperate confusion between lust and fear of loss, and from now on, start pointless fights, fake love and desire instead of feeling it for real, pay her compliments I don't mean, ignore her calls, cheat, and above all, remind us both constantly that her feelings don't matter?

Yes. The LGBTQ community openly embraces and understands the role that polarity plays within a romantic relationship. And this polarity is fluid, however, individuals tend to have a preference on which role they would like to play. Often times, the sex of that individual heavily contributes to the role they have preference for.

I don't have the slightest problem with any of this. Yes, people are aware of "traditional" gender roles, and may find them useful in their relationships to pick and choose as they see fit, and it may often feel intuitive for that to match your biological sex or gender.

But the thing is, it's directly contradicted by officially sanctioned, Red Pill "theory" on "Managing Your Bitches":

In order to sustain a prosperous relationship with a girl, you MUST be comfortable with bossing her around - being a bonafide Patriarch™.

You don't have to be a master of your emotions yet. But at the very least, you must be willing to be firm with her, give her orders, and tell her "no", even against a flood of her tears. Why?

Because ultimately, women get their behavioural cues from men. Remember, women are children: mentally, behaviourally, evolutionarily. They are not like us. They don’t think like us, or have the same deep sense of personal responsibility. Even the most sociopathic man will intuitively know when he has crossed a boundary and offended another man. Whether or not he feels guilty about it is a different issue, but he at least knows he’s done something wrong. Evolving this instinct was the key to a man’s ability to either strategically make enemies or avoid unwanted conflicts. Women, on the other hand, evolved no such instinct. On the contrary, women evolved the instinct to push a man’s buttons as a way of testing his willingness to face conflict head-on (what we call shit-testing). A man who is willing to fight against her will also fight FOR her. Likewise, a man who caves before her will most certainly cave before his enemies.

This is why bossing her around is key. She is evolved to push the boundary by picking fights with you. So unless you are strict with your girl, she will become as selfish and insufferable as you let her get away with.

How can red pillers not see the self-fulfilling prophecy at work here? If you assume your dysfunctional relationships are entirely because of women being incapable of integrity and good faith discussions, and have to be "outmaneuvered" and gaslit proactively, then obviously the only relationships that will ever "last" will be the ones where women don't dump/divorce you for being a sociopathic douchebag.

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 2 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, men tend to make decisions based off rationality where as women tend to make decisions based off of what feels right. This is of course is just a trend, and there is no reason to believe women are incapable of rational thinking and men are incapable of following what feels best.

Sure, that's fine. In fact, it is somewhat supported by research:

Despite the weak evidence for gender differences in care and justice orientations, Greene’s (2007) dual-process model offers a novel perspective on gender differences in moral psychology on the basis of fundamental differences in nonmoral information processing. Although there is little evidence for gender differences in cognitive processing, gender differences in affective processing are common and robust. For example, men and women score equally high on need for cognition (Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, & Jarvis, 1996), and gender differences in cognitive ability tend to be rather small (Hyde, 1981). Yet, women tend to experience stronger emotional responses than men (e.g., Brody & Hall, 2000; Cross & Madson, 1997; Fischer & Manstead, 2000; Gross & John, 1998); they are more persuaded by messages appealing to emotion (Meyer & Tormala, 2010); they score higher on measures of empathic concern (for a review, see Eisenberg & Lennon, 1983); and they are more adept at identifying with other’s emotional states (e.g., Bullis & Horn, 1995; for a review, see Hall & Schmid Mast, 2008). Together with Greene’s dual-process model, these findings suggest that men and women may not differ in terms of their cognitive evaluations of outcomes and thus show equal levels of utilitarian judgments. However, women may experience stronger Friesdorf et al. 3 affective responses to harm than men, leading to systematic gender differences in deontological judgments.

Though, to be clear, there's no indication this makes men's decision-making process more optimal or superior. In fact, by consulting with women, or deferring to female leadership decisions, a great many situations would almost certainly be resolved with greater accountability to human impact.

No, it is taboo to discuss the differences of the two genders. To say anything besides "we are equals" is demonized. We are not equals, and I'd like to make my stance on that clear. In fact, not a single person can ever be equal to another, regardless of gender.

Is it? I don't have a problem with that, personally. Seems to me Red Pill's problem on evolutionary psychology isn't a matter of validity, but degree. Red Pill wants you to admit "Ah ha! The science says dude brains aren't female brains!" and then have free reign to say whatever-the-fuck from there.

We are all equitable however, and that is true regardless of gender.

I don't know what that means.

Yes, gender does not limit anybody on achieving anything.

Cool. Welcome to feminism!

Broadly understood, feminism is both an intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks an end to gender-based oppression. Motivated by the quest for social justice, feminist inquiry provides a wide range of perspectives on cultural, economic, social, and political phenomena. It identifies and evaluates the many ways that some norms have been used to exclude, marginalize, and oppress people on the basis of gender, as well as how gendered dentities have been shaped to conform and uphold the norms of a patriarchal society. In so doing, it tries to understand the roots of a system that has been prevalent in nearly all known places and times. It also explores what a just society would look like.

We do need a better articulated conception of male-centric gender equality progress, though. On that, you'll get no argument from me.

We need to start thinking about manhood differently. And by “we,” I don’t just mean guys—I mean women too. Maybe what’s really going on is more of a role reversal than either men or women realize, or are ready to admit. But denying this reversal won’t help; it can only dig us all deeper into today’s male identity crisis. Every time I approach major corporations about talking to their employees about what it means to be a good man, they steer me toward their executive women’s group—who, they insist, would be delighted to talk about manhood. When I ask why they don’t have a men’s group, the response is an unsatisfactory combination of legal rules (it could be viewed as illegally discriminatory against women) and pop psychology.

Red Pill does a much better job engaging the attention of men who are sexually frustrated, and want answers to questions like "How do I get what I want from life, without getting kicked in the teeth?" I certainly think it's high time we had a "Men's Rights" movement that dealt with that in a non-toxic way.

So, to summarize, you believe:

Half the human population is fundamentally wired to be without empathy, dangerous, and to pose, by far, the biggest threat to the happiness and wellbeing of the other half, and unfortunately, it falls to women to break this cycle of enslavement.

No. Half the population is wired to have less empathy, not to be entirely incapable of it. This is a fact. I stated nothing about danger nor threats towards happiness. Just a desire for men feel capable and in control of the things they find important.

Okay, so I played a dirty trick here. But only to illustrate how easy it is for us to back ourselves into corners where we see the gender we're attracted to as our "adversaries", because so much is at stake.

1 is the conclusion of Red Pill's own, "too taboo to handle" manifesto of misogyny, which literally defines love between a man and a woman as non-equitable, and more advantageous to women, by far:

AirForceNerd · 2023-08-13T15:28:13+00:00

I'm not here to stir up drama. I just found it interesting reading all these posts. I agree with most of the points made, and I was shocked how a lot...

WHAT IS LOVE?

Man has been manipulated by woman to the point where he cannot live without her and therefore will do anything she asks of him. He fights for his life and calls it love. There are even men who will threaten their idolized female with suicide unless she accepts him.[..]

To a woman love means power, to a man enslavement. [..] When a woman marries, she gives up her career for the sake of love.' When a man marries, he will have to work for twofor the sake of love.' [..] The system forces her to be corrupt, but no one is going to worry about that. [..] The more he tries to ingratiate himself with her, the more demanding she will become; the more he desires her, the less she finds him desirable; the more comforts he provides for her, the more indolent, stupid and inhuman she will become - and man will grow lonelier as a result.

Only woman can break the vicious circle of man's manipulation and exploitation - but she will not do it. There is absolutely no compelling reason why she should. It is useless to appeal to her feelings, for she is callous and knows no pity. And so the world will go on, sinking deeper and deeper into this morass of kitsch, barbarism, and inanity called femininity. And man, that wonderful dreamer, will never awaken from his dream.

Men are hurting. I get it. "Men's rights" shouldn't be a dirty phrase. But red pill ain't the answer, my friend. In fact, by the sounds of it, you're not even truly "red-pilled." Just a guy trying to be better.

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 2 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'd advise you to take that post at your own discretion and decide what is too extreme for you. Using dread is not over the top or too extreme in my eyes (in fact, it's quite hard to have a relationship with absolutely no dread.), but starting fights for the fuck of it or flat out lying about cheating is crossing the line for me.

"Dread" is just a form of preselection, and preselection is well documented in psychology. Preselection does not have to be sexual, but in the case of dread game, it is. Knowing someone is popular makes you treat them like they are popular, and knowing someone is dangerous makes you treat them like they are dangerous. This information is provided to you by others around you, and how they treat that individual, and if you apply preselection to dating, seeing a lot of women (or men) treat your partner as if they wanted them, it would make you feel like you had a real catch, and subconsciously, would inspire anxiety about losing this "catch."

Keep in mind there are levels to dread, and this user is posting very extreme tactics for inducing dread. In a lot of cases, simply working out and dressing well is enough to induce dread. Hell, even being busy can induce dread.

Counter question for you, is properly grooming yourself and staying on top of your health over the top and "too extreme" OR do you have a set of morals that tell you what is right and wrong that let you decide what you are and aren't willing to do?, and more importantly, WHY you do those things?

I do not see how the material cited directly contradicts what we agree on with observations found in the LGBTQ community.

Speaking on the material though, you are absolutely right in your conclusion. Believing that relationships are a certain thing manifests that into all of your relationships. Red pill is a theory, and while it's evolution has slowed down, it has not stopped. Attachment theory dates back to the 70s or 80s, and to my knowledge, very little of it has been acknowledged by the RP community. This is the only post I've seen mentioning it. This post is 2 months old. A great read on the theory is "Attached."

It's a fairly robust theory with hundreds of studies supporting it, but to water it down for this comment, there are two types of relationships, secure and insecure. There are (mainly) three types of attachment styles, anxious, avoidant, and secure. Each person has an attachment style, and that attachment style is calibrated by that person's experiences primarily with their parents between the ages 0-5. If an insecure person (anxious or avoidant) dates a secure person, we see that the relationship is secure, long-lasting, and healthy. This is true for secure-secure pairs aswell. However, if an anxious and avoidant enter into a relationship, this results in an insecure relationship.

Avoidants, by far, are having the most sex and encountering the most partners. This is what red pill teaches men to model. The flaw with this however, is that these relationships are not long nor are they very fulfilling, but they are sexually passionate.

And if this avoidant starts to display more anxious traits, his partner will flip to the opposite pole, and will then become avoidant. This is a very well-studied and supported explanation of the "betaization" process that we often see between men and women. The man starts off avoidant, slowly becomes anxious, and watches his partner move on to someone else. The whole ordeal is riddled with insecurity and toxicity, but a man who is capable of remaining avoidant will experience much better and much more sex than the man who has an anxious attachment style.

And yes, I'd argue that if I approached 100 people at random and said "Men and Women aren't equals" I'd get a lot of harsh responses. This is purely a belief and I have not tested it. But the point I'm making is that, that statement alone is not politically correct. Even though it is true, it is still taboo to say that. in the short term, and red pill is still a great tool for teaching men how to do that.

You are correct. Men's thinking processes are not more optimal or superior, they are just oftentimes more rational. Let it be known that I don't think "more rational" is good or bad, it is simply an observation. I also think that men and women can play off of each other's strengths to find more success in problem solving and achieving happiness and fulfillment. We are pairs, and work best when we work together.

And yes, I'd argue that if I approached 100 people at random and said "Men and Women aren't equals" I'd get a lot of harsh responses. This is purely a believe and I have not tested it. But the point I'm making is that, that statement alone is not politically correct. Even though it is true, it is still taboo to say that.

If you wanted to say "Men and women are not equals", you would have to do as you have done, and cite studies and give explanations as to why that is the case. But to say men and women are not equals, and not to follow that up with something, is taboo and will make people look down upon you. The culture we live in today very much favors the idea that everyone is equal.

When I say equitable, I mean value. We are not the same, but no one person is better or worse than another. We are all worth the same and everyone should be treated as such. In eastern philosophies, at our core we are all the same.

2./ 1. Sadly, I think Red Pill and the manosphere is the closest thing we have in terms of a men's right movement. And it has it's flaws, but so does feminism. This all seems to be a work in progress, and I think this topic will only become more and more prevalent as decades go by.

Men want to feel masculine. Men want to feel capable and they want to feel needed. Men want to have purpose. There are no more bears for us to kill, and the last thing we had, the family unit, is starting to dissolve as polarity between the two sexes diminishes. What is the point of finding success in your career if nobody is depending on you? Of what use is that man? He is unfulfilled and left feeling hollow, what is his purpose, if he has no domain to rule over? Without anyone needing guidance or to be provided for, what does that man have? He feels incapable and expendable, and taking steps towards being more masculine is labeled toxic. He is urged by society to be depolarized, more feminine, and is taught that it is wrong to have desires for power, control, and dominance. He is taught to suppress a key component of himself. Very few places exist for men who want to be more masculine, red pill and the manosphere being the biggest "pro-masculine" communities out there.

Of course, red pill does not come without flaws, but it is one of the only places that will tell men to "man the fuck up" and a lot of men need that. Having a community that will call you out on your bullshit, tell you to stop being a pussy, call things out as they see it, and encourage you to be more masculine is what a lot of men are discovering they needed. And a lot of men need a blueprint to follow on how to be more masculine, and how to feel more capable of having the passionate sex that they desire. RP is that space, and I'd imagine that it will only grow larger and become more refined/ less toxic as the years go by.

[–]CommentsEdited1 point 2 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]liveultimate1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NegativeKarmaVegan 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NegativeKarmaVegan 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor- 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AssistTemporary8422 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

For me, hearing about hypergamy makes sense to me and inspires no hatred towards women, just a better understanding.

Believing in hypergamy results in guys focusing on career and self-improvement and still being just as awkward with women. The truth is looks and being good at talking to women matter a lot more.

You are the reason for your success or lack of success.

That is mostly true but there are a lot of factors outside your control at play here. Research has found that genetics dictates 50% of outcomes. A lot of your personality and your looks are ingrained and are impossible to completely change. You can greatly improve your life by improving the things in your control but there will always be limits depending on who you are.

Take accountability for your life. Start living for yourself and start putting yourself first. Work on your shit.

Yet most of the guys in the red pill still struggle with dating and actually implementing the advice they hear. They are just watching video after video. This is the problem with self-help and advice in general.

The solution is to look into the science of habits and evidence-ways to do self-improvement rather than just trying really hard. Also many of these people have mental health issues that causes them to self-sabotage so maybe they need some therapy.

[–]StarTrippinn 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AssistTemporary8422 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that depends on the woman. Some women care about looks a lot, others don't. Most people aren't fully aware of how looks impact how they treat people on a subconscious level. And even by your own admission him being unattractive was a turnoff at first and something that had to be made up for. Being attractive will help with first impressions at the very least and research has shown that first impressions are very important especially in the fast paced world of today.

I agree with you that emotional intelligence is a big problem for red pill men. On a deeper level most of them have mental health issues that impact their demeanor. They only think in terms of status and sometimes looks or game. But a huge factor in attraction is a unique connection and compatibility between two individuals that creates this shared investment and bond between them over time which we call love.

[–]Due_Course9213 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Downtown_Cat_1172 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Downtown_Cat_1172 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm red pill.

Red pill says "be your own man and make your own rules. Stop being who you think other people want you to be." That's the end goal of red pill theory.

If you want to be dommed by your woman and wear a leash for her in the bedroom, don't feel ashamed about that.

If you want to be friends with women, don't let anyone tell you that your wrong for that.

If you want to have kids and settle down, go for it. If you don't, learn how to not feel pressured by society to do so.

If you want to fuck a ton of women, don't put up with anyone calling you a misogynist.

Red pill does not say you must be a high value alpha male, but it does define and describe what that'd look like. Seeing as a lot of men who gravitate towards red pill are on the spectrum, a lot of them need that defined and described to them.

[–]SweelFor- 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor- 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor- 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]SweelFor-1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor-1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor-1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WWhiMM 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SweelFor- 31 points32 points33 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sweet-Euphoria-42 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Sweet-Euphoria-42 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately, a lot of people who come across red pill content cannot make that discretion.

"AWALT". Why wouldn't they?

You speak as if you've made that distinction, but the generalized way you spoke about it does not indicate that. Hypergamy is spoken about as if it's this HUGE thing and one of the only features of women, but it's presented in a covertly deceptive way. Intentionally. That is not "Red Pill".

This is a very flawed version that's being taught to vulnerable men who are now looking for guidance and are being indoctrinated into a very narrow interpretation of human behavior.

Most of it is post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking with very little to back it up.

Being "Red Pill" means that you accept that this is one of many behaviors that are pushed on and rewarded by society, but simultaneously looking down on women for participating in a way that tHe PaTriArChY has very much forced.

"Do it like this! But also don't do it like this! If you do it the way I force you to, you're bad. If you don't do it this way, you're bad and a FemiNiSt."

There is no safe way out of this thinking. Every direction is a trap.

[–]ChillwaveSos 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]CommentsEdited 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Sweet-Euphoria-42 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ifhes 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rafaman777 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]AcrobaticRhubarb2147 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AcrobaticRhubarb2147 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

perhaps I don't know what I don't know, if there are any scientific studies supporting these red pill gurus like Rollo, Fresh and Fit, Pearly or others, I'm not aware of them. The "still face experiment" disproves the act indifferent and aloof red pill ideology. The still face experiment has been replicated over and over again on adult romantic relationships. The Gottman's call the silent treatment one of the 4 horseman. Andrew Huberman has a podcast on love and attachment where he actually quotes the scientific literature and none of the science supports the red pill ideology for long term mating success. I have also followed David Buss and while he has found some interesting findings in terms of evolutionary psyche, his scientific studies largely refute the red pill ideology. some of the red pill obviously has an observable amount of common truths, I'm not refuting all of it. but red pill men and their toxic abusive behavior is largely encapsulated in a book from Lundy Bancroft called "why does he do that?" Lundy worked with abusive men, who abused women. Read that book and read the red bill subreddit and unfortunately you will see a lot of similarities of the men in that book (admitted batterers and the people posting on the red pill subreddit). but again, that's just my observation. none of what I seen from the red pill gurus site any scientific studies to back up the garbage they spew

[–]Public_Survey_6812 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KindlyPizza -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IrishShee 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AirForceNerd[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not overlooking it, I do agree it's a flaw in the community. I've stated why it's there and the purpose it trying serve.

And the majority if things I've said and believe absolutely come from self help books. Each book thus far has been recommended to me by the red pill side bar.

But I stand by red pill because at it's core it says we'd all prefer relationships that are romantically passionate, rather than something closer to a friendship. It also says that in order for this passion to be present, there needs to be a masculine and a feminine polarity between the two individuals. The LGTBQ community has an intuitive understanding of this (Top and Bottom, Dom and Sub, Mas and Fem.) Red pill teaches men what masculinity looks like, and attempts to explain what femininity looks like.

I have not come across a community with that goal in mind, nor with such extensive road maps and resources to follow.

[–]CryptographerFew6506 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	I'm still red pilled
Author	AirForceNerd
Upvotes	0
Comments	77
Date	August 13, 2023 3:28 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/ExRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/exredpill/comments/15q1rs5/im_still_red_pilled/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/ExRedPill/im-still-red-pilled.1228146 https://theredarchive.com/post/1228146