Does the language you use to describe women dehumanise them?

Cactux3000 · 2020-07-16T14:12:38+00:00

[removed]

LeanLoner · 2020-07-16T12:57:04+00:00

Fuckboy, manchild, scrote, moid, cumbrain, neckbeard, creepy, short, bald, pasty, boy toy, dog, ATM, pig

edit: please don't monetarily support this degenerate website by gilding comments.

Kaisha001 · 2020-07-16T13:06:42+00:00

This is the classic 'loaded question fallacy'.

Do you find using language that otherizes women make you feel less guilty for using manipulation to get them to sleep with you?

Implying of course that all men use manipulation to sleep with women...

FeniZio94 · 2020-07-16T12:39:21+00:00

On the contrary, the language we use humanizes the women as they are, rather than how TBP fantasy describes them.

The language we use simply takes women off the pedestal, but it seems that women have a problem with that.

woxmintari · 2020-07-16T12:37:12+00:00

No it does not dehumanise them. Men are subject to similar terms. Your looking at this from the female perspective only, as men we constantly see women use thier sexuality to get men to commit to them or for free stuff or attention (18-35). So to say men are damaging women emotionally by feigning commitment for sex is laughable.

SteveSan82 · 2020-07-16T12:55:00+00:00

No. One point in TRP is to never promise commitment. Commitment turns women off. She needs to know you have options and will have no problem leaving her.

TheKarmicWoosh2 · 2020-07-16T13:35:33+00:00

Quite the opposite. The Men who turn to TRP have a history of pedestalizing Women and seeing them as MORE than Human. Godly, ethereal, angelic etc. Other Men to these guys ARE normal humans which is why they don't really give af about them. Using this language just puts Women on the same level that they would Men. Normal people who shit and fart and are fallible and who gaf.

The natural state of a Man is no one giving a fuck about your existence, that's how Men treat other Men.

XtoDoubt · 2020-07-16T12:43:34+00:00

One of the main things I see pushed by TRP is to essentially manipulate women into thinking your going to commit to them in order to get sex.

Who? Where? I have no idea where this idea comes from in the anti-trp crowd. This is fake beta game that no sidebar material, endorsed contributor, or generally well known RP content creator has ever recommended.

NinjaOfTheSouth · 2020-07-16T12:46:01+00:00

Well no. You treating them like a regular joe, a human. You don’t give a fuck about them, so what if it’s a female? Men are just continually treating women like a man. (Like there not special)

brinkleybuzz · 2020-07-16T14:46:10+00:00

I prefer use the word "objectify" rather than "dehumanize".

It's how the game is played.

Men objectify women.

Women certainly objectify men.

Fuckboy, playboy, sugar daddy, baby daddy, side piece, nice guy, boyfriend material, husband material, friend(zone), etc.

We all place each other into categories based on sexual persona and relationship status. Women are just better than men at using innocuous language to describe these categories.

Dan240z · 2020-07-16T12:59:31+00:00

If you don't build a solid foundation using red pill philosophy than sure it's manipulation I had to do the work in order to get what I want from life including women that's how I was able to get more date's than the previous years when you talk about manipulation that's a guy that practice pua stuff without handling his own personal issues like making more money or working out ect. Pua can only take you so far before you are found out as a fraud. And then lastly the language used is more so a descriptor like in marketing nothing more if you find that "dehumanizing" that's a you problem.

taapy234 · 2020-07-16T15:25:59+00:00

I wouldn't call it dehumanize.

The accurate description would be de-pedestaling.

largeslavicman · 2020-07-16T16:08:52+00:00

No, I don’t like women anyways.

godaray98 · 2020-07-16T16:37:06+00:00

Humanity is at its core a bullshit concept. We are just like other animals, complex, reproducing chemical equilibria. There is nothing noble or special about your "humanity". Women are more prone to this delusion but men can fall for it too.

I absolutely dont care what you call me, and neither should you because your identity is a lie.

Grave_Heresy · 2020-07-16T17:18:13+00:00

So after being on here and a few other places In the "manosphere" I've noticed a trend of the guys there using strange terminology to describe the women they're hooking up with/talking about I.e "plates", "stacies" or even just females.

Plates? Yes. A plate is an object.

Stacies: 50/50

Essentially, it is describing a white female with high reproductive fitness who ranks moderate to high in narcissistic entitlement. Someone could use the words "A white females with high reproductive fitness who ranks high in narcissistic entitlement" but the word "Stacy" is much simpler. That being said, it does diminish the individuality of a person. But if you are making a statement about a group or highlighting the group affiliation of an individual, then you are not trying to highlight their individual behavior. Unless, you are doing so for the purpose of describing an individual going off their social script. In which case, you are pointing out said person's individuality. So no harm, no foul.

Females: No.

Describing the behaviors of a sex when discussing that sex would be hard to do if you did not use a descriptor for that sex yes? Females are females and males are males. To call them anything else has no separate effect because the said descriptor still holds the same function in the language. This isn't dehumanization, its using descriptive language.

One of the main things I see pushed by TRP is to essentially manipulate women into thinking your going to commit to them in order to get sex.

If it's what you see then its what you see. But this isn't unique to RP.

Most people would feel bad about this because they know they're damaging the other person in some form. But if you never refer to them as people its easier to not feel like guilty, "I mean she was just another plate am I right?"

So your hypothesis is that dehumanization plays a moderating role in decisions to manipulate others into sex? There is probably a research on this already.

Do you find using language that otherizes women make you feel less guilty for using manipulation to get them to sleep with you?

It's possible. But it's easier to just think of intersexual competition and acknowledge that the two of us have competing interests. Both of us are trying to get the upper hand on the other. While I may be using the promise of a relationship to gain sex, she is using the promise of sex to gain a relationship.

This is because evolution has given us competing desires. From her perspective, its very costly to have a child (9 mo gestation, child birth, child rearing). So she needs good genes and a good provider/protector. For me, I need to copulate with as many females as possible since I don't have paternal certainty (Mind you this evolved before DNA testing). It is costly to invest all of my resources (Time, energy, physical goods) into one person. It is also risky since I may die protecting offspring that aren't even mine (Again this evolved before paternity testing was invented). Today similar rules apply (Albeit legal and scientific advancements have relieved both sexes quite a bit). We are still playing the same game.

TRPer doesn't need to dehumanize women. He only needs to study how they are. Female behavior is the ultimate justification for gaming.

All of this said, TRP is not about what you do to women. Its what you know about women and men. Please don't conflate the practice with the theory.

Mobrowncheeks · 2020-07-16T17:32:06+00:00

It doesn’t really matter what word they use, if you call women, women, bitches, hoes, plates, stacies, femoids, or even by their individual names. If the men using the word doesn’t have a general respect for, and can’t individualize women in their minds, then the objectification will be the same

snakewithnoname · 2020-07-16T19:20:11+00:00

Plate? That’s a new one. I’ve heard “stacies”, and the worst one I’ve heard is “roastie”. Never have I heard any of those terms genuinely used in the flesh, just online. I’ve heard “female” but that’s usually when referring to someone in a situation never women as a whole and never in a dating context either.

Anyway, to answer your question: no. I don’t use any sort of other-izing language towards women. Nor do I manipulate women in an attempt to sleep with them. That seems wrong. Why would you want to treat or talk to a group of people you’re attracted to like shit?

I’m already shy and not very good at talking to women I’m attracted to as it is, so I don’t need an extra layer of frustration. I’m also not that smart with women/people.

EDIT: misread your question, so disregard me. Seeing as how I don’t manipulate women into sleeping with me, there’s no need for me to use that sort of language. So nevermind!

spacechicken1990 · 2020-07-16T13:29:52+00:00

[deleted]

psypD · 2020-07-16T14:07:50+00:00

No. I feel perfectly fine and justified of using and manipulating "humans" for my own interests. I don't need to "dehumanize" anyone because "humans" are fair game. That "dehumanization" BS is mostly a female concept and tactic.

Zippo-Cat · 2020-07-16T14:30:58+00:00

No, because "dehumanize" is a bullshit term made up by bullshit people to push their bullshit agenda.

Barely-moral · 2020-07-16T12:57:03+00:00

Do you find using language that otherizes women make you feel less guilty for using manipulation to get them to sleep with you?

Nope because I don't feel any guilt for using manipulation on anyone.

If I avoid causing harm to people it is because I have my own principles, not because of guilt.

Also, if men following TRP are manipulating women to get what they want that does not mean that they dehumanise them.

Scams target humans you know? Men target other men (humans) for scams all the time.

If anything scamming women is treating them as equals (humans). Men prey on each other all the time.

extrachromozomes · 2020-07-16T18:07:22+00:00

They are all psychopaths and sociopaths

AutoModerator · 2020-07-16T12:28:05+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

akihonj · 2020-07-16T13:25:42+00:00

No and I don't see why it would, if for example I'm talking about women then I'll say women, a woman then it's a woman, if it's in a scientific sense then I might say females as compared to males.

If any of that is dehumanising to you then I might suggest that it's you with the problem because they are terms that have been used for at least the last 100 years, recognised across the world to refer to the subjects they relate to.

-Siptah · 2020-07-16T14:43:58+00:00

No, I prefer to them as they are, women.Also many RP’s myself included are convinced that majority of women have an ulterior motive, she’s not yours it’s just your turn. That she’ll use her looks to get what she wants out of you. That she’s incapable of ever truly caring about you. The 2 main ways to deal with this is by playing the game by manipulating them back. Or deciding that you have enough self worth by going your own way instead.

As for the subject of calling women by different names, I tend to thing it’s hypocrisy on both sides. The difference is men get cancelled for doing so, women? Not so much. Given the current narrative of woman=good, men=bad.

welcometothejl · 2020-07-16T15:03:44+00:00

No, I don't typically use that type of language and if I did I don't think I would feel any differently about not wanting to continue a relationship after sleeping with someone. Do you feel like not getting a commitment after sex ruins lovemaking after the fact because you expect to get something in return? Essentially, sex isn't an equal transaction between a man and a woman, but something a woman gives a man in exchange for commitment?

-Solitude-- · 2020-07-16T15:12:55+00:00

As a MGTOW, I don’t really use the terms “stacy” and “plate”. Usually just “AWALT”. With that said, I don’t find terms like any of the above really dehumanize women to a noteworthy extent. I certainly think less of women than many guys may, but I can say with complete certainty that I still see them as people. Just... not as people that are particularly nice.

hammerhaunts · 2020-07-16T15:29:21+00:00

There's an elaborate system of lies male / liberal feminists came up with to do this and avoid sounding misogynistic for it. Men wanting to spin plates is dehumanizing, so it is reframed as women wanting to have sex just because they want to, only for their sake, and not wanting more. Although once they do want more, it gets easy to find something else to demonize the man for.

Sid_Insidious · 2020-07-16T16:08:13+00:00

Sorry, re-read the criterion and caveats and had to re-write.

> Do you find using language that otherizes women make you feel less guilty for using manipulation to get them to sleep with you?

To the OP. Is this question for only men who use manipulation to get sex? Or is directed to all men because ALL men use manipulation to get sex?

Need to know this before I bother to answer...

upalse · 2020-07-16T16:41:33+00:00

You're coming at this from idealistic angle that humans should somehow humanize strangers no matter what. This can be normatively prescribed into some sort of shaming framework, but It's not how we work on cognitive level.

You can pretend to care about strangers to appear more empathetic, if this is olympics in empathy. But really, you're just donating to charity very much publicly and theatrically instead of anonymously a person genuinely caring would. People who donate anonymously have deeply personal reasons for doing so. For instance a person who's subject to a lot of prejudice has genuine reason to care about prejudice.

So yes, it's perfectly normal to speak about bunch of strangers like they're bunch of strangers, and not comrades. Women that I don't know could be called just females (it still sounds weird tbh). Women that I do know are women.

Human respect is a two way thing, hence why in reality we humanize individuals we have mutual respect with.

Of course this aspect of our cognition gives rise to nasty side-effects, pitting in-groups against out-groups. One should be definitely careful about that. The dehumanized group is just an abstract symbol for a large swath of people you don't know, save for few anecdotal examples. If you go out of your way and generalize, it's pretty tricky business to make an implication the group is some sort of hivemind unless you have pretty solid explanation why the herd behaves in peculiar fashion as a herd.

HollowLegMonk · 2020-07-16T16:58:09+00:00

One of the main things I see pushed by TRP is to essentially manipulate women into thinking your going to commit to them in order to get sex.

Source?

Cleanit_up_Jannies · 2020-07-16T17:53:04+00:00

i see trp claiming you should manipulate women by making them think you will commit to a relationship if she gives up sex

This isnt true though. The strategy is to not care so that she will offer sex in order to get you to commit. Men are told through trp to look out for their own interests, women do the same but go about it the wrong way by giving up free milk instead of displaying the value of the cow.

most people would feel bad about this because theyre damaging someone else

Only if you assume manipulation. The reality is you dont need to manipulate them into anything, you just need to have looks, display value and guard your own interest. If she thinks you're worth it she will give out sex. Its also quite ridiculous to assume this is some intentional damage, most women have casual sex, many of them get hurt by chasing men way out of their leagues rather than a trp informed guy who "manipulates them". At what point do women have any accountability for their choices in your loaded question? You cant make it so its liberating every time they enjoy it but manipulative abuse every time they dont.

is it easier to not feel guilty by dehumanizing them?

Of course it is, this is true for everything though. Scammers, muggers, murderers, armies at war, drug dealers, its obviously easier to fuck someone over when you dehumanize them.

does using the language make you feel less guilty when you manipulate them into sleeping with you?

Your questions are seriously loaded. The answer is no, language doesnt make me feel less guilt, feminism does. If a woman is an equal then she has an equal responsibility to look out for her own interests properly. If she wants to have sex with me to get me to commit thats her prerogative and ultimately her mistake because that choice disqualifies her in my book. Once shes disqualified herself i dont care what she does, because i no longer consider her for anything more than sex. If she makes me wait and is someone who does show self worth and respect, I'll consider dating her. In the end its her own decisions that determine whether or not i will "dehumanize her" and just use her for sex.

I dont have to manipulate anyone into sex, though i will admit that behaving like a complete sociopath works better than simply being yourself. Women want to live out a fantasy, so if you actually shape her fantasies then she will move mountains to make it come true. The issue there is again, on women, who need to get their heads of the clouds and actually guard their own interests instead of letting others influence them so easily.

MikepGrey · 2020-07-16T17:56:21+00:00

Probably going to get called a white night (get the pun?) for this, but here goes.

When people have shit you want, you find a way to treat them as things to justify taking what you want and leaving them totally fucked up.

Boys... Chads (also known as TWATS or total wastes ah time) do this as their mating strategy is to pump kids into women and flee to never pay child support.

Girls... Cunts (cant understand normal thinking) do this via marriage rape which is built off the silly idea they can use their looks forever to get free stuff (until they hit the wall and go "where are all the good men at!".

And this is why no man of worth will actually commit no matter what he says and the dating index of the human race is all up in the air until it finds ground again, mostly waiting on the women to pull their heads out of their ass's as men can always rent love, women take a risk every time to bed a dude who may turn into a violent abusive prick.

(gender roles exist to protect you ladies, when the hell will you figure that out)

AfterRaise · 2020-07-16T19:56:15+00:00

Why don't you like it if a dude calls a someone he's seeing a female companion?

Ecocavalry · 2020-07-16T20:30:04+00:00

If things were so easy as you put it, more men would be fooling women into having sex. I hate that BP thinks of women as sheep and basically idiots with no agency. Doesn't every women know men like to objectify them and want to have sex with them?

If a women feels she is getting damaged from Terpers, she should just stop sleeping with them. If a woman wants to be damaged by a man, it's her choice and agency that led her to that path, why should the manosphere be held responsible for her stupidity.

Just because you had sex with a man doesn't mean he owes you anything, he has the freedom to walk away, not caring one bit about your feelings. Does that make him a bad person? Who cares, I am not maintaining a moral ledger. Maybe women are too narcissistic to understand the world is larger than their suffering from not getting commitment, but I know I am asking too much.

Repeat after me, "Women have agency, Women are not idiots that can be easily manipulated, Strange men you have sex with don't owe you anything. If the outcome didn't turn out in your favor don't bitch about the process ,you were a willing participant in it".

As for the language, maybe you ignore the other 99 cases where men dehumanize men. Language policing is the stupidest thing in the world. Words are air, they don't matter. If you find manosphere offensive, avoid it, it's so easy, their subs are quarantined. But to go after quarantined subs, who mind their own business, to adhere to your stupid rules just speaks about your entitlement and narcissism.

theinnerdork · 2020-07-16T23:18:06+00:00

You have to generalize when talking about all nacho recipes.

spacechicken1990 · 2020-07-17T01:01:13+00:00

u/spacechicken1990 why did you delete the post ? 👀

Suck-Less · 2020-07-16T13:42:49+00:00

In a world of 67 pronouns, they are lucky I don’t use “it” Female is often most appropriate. It is biologically specific.

Sultmaker_9000 · 2020-07-16T15:17:44+00:00

There's no real manipulation. You'll most likely be living by the 3 date rule, see her once a week at most, screwing her until she gives up trying to chase you into a relationship. You might have to say 'I like to take my time with a woman' after a month which is the only time she gets led on, but the penny will drop by around month 3-4, and she'll just leave you.

3 date rule means she's fair game. Nobody has ever hooked up under the pretence its for LTR.

The 3 date rule which most live by is a fucking ridiculously low bar to set women, no player is 'leading a woman on' wining and dining even for 60 days just to get some pussy.

FeniZio94 · 2020-07-16T13:30:56+00:00

Remember

Modern women, have chosen to dehumanize themselves... modern men don’t dehumanize women, because we know that - based on feminist like activities - they make themselves look worthless as fuck

2020-07-16T16:18:13+00:00

Edit: dont reply with "but women" this is a question for you not them.

BUT WOMEN

And the reason this is important is that women are natural manipulators. It comes easy to them because the warm wet hole between their legs is basically like carrying around a bunch of value all the time lmao, so they start from an enhanced negotiating position.

Men need colorful language in order to get the into the right mindset. Some women it should be noted, also use dehumanizing language, but they don't need to in order to enact their schemes--not because all of them are that much more cunning than men, but because warm wet hole does half the work for them as it is.

Of course, it makes sense evolutionarily, since women are basically frail and useless (except for warm wet hole), they would of course need to pass down exceptional manipulation abilities in order to successfully extract resources like good little whores...but it's a good thing because every once in a while that selfish extraction helps a wombfruit

wheatbeer510 · 2020-07-16T15:04:42+00:00

Don't see how these words are dehumanizing in the slightest. We have terms like these for men too not just women, having this lingo and stuff is just part of the culture and often simplifies conversation

decoy88 · 2020-07-16T17:38:14+00:00

I don’t think so, but I’m a vulgar guys in general. “Bitch”, “Pussy”, “Hoe” “Sket” “Niggarina” all these terms make up my regular daily usage, whether seriously or in jest.

But I don’t think it dehumanises women in my view because I see every person as people.

Now does the language dehumanise women to other people who hear me? No idea.

sammyv1667 · 2020-07-16T17:07:36+00:00

This very question is dehumanizing to women. You should not use "women", you should use "womyn". Why yolk women with men by putting "men" in it?

Title	Does the language you use to describe women dehumanise them?
Author	spacechicken1990
Upvotes	79
Comments	334
Date	July 16, 2020 12:28 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/hs8q4z/does_the_language_you_use_to_describe_women/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/does-the-language-you-use-to-describe-women.713701 https://theredarchive.com/post/713701