I'm going to write this as a sort of "let me know what you think" post.

I'm not sure if I was fully into the red pill but I definitely endorsed some beliefs that fall quite squarely into redpill territory. I bought into the whole 80/20 rule (80% of men are unattractive to women - nevermind no definition of what is attractive making such a 'rule' impossible to verify), status being of utmost importance to attracting women, etc. But I think one of the things that drew me to the redpill was the fact it seemed to be based on science. I love studying evolution and I did psychology in college so naturally redpill's evo psych had an appeal.

I think for me, the appeal was reading studies based on what men and women found attractive and wondering how I could apply these to my life. For example, I recall reading one study that reported women found men paired with exceptionally beautiful women to be more attractive than when he was paired with a less attractive women - because being with such a beautiful woman was indicative of status. This might made me ponder, will being seen with conventionally attractive women make me more attractive to other women? The lure was the fact that these studies done on attraction were, of course, studies, so it made sense to consider their findings and adjust my behavior accordingly.

However....

I'm not saying these studies are false but I think a far better use of time is to simply go out an interact with women and find out how they act based on your experiences with them, not some study in evolutionary psychology. Once again, nothing wrong with reading these studies (data) but don't substitute their findings in place of actual interactions with people (anecdotes).