What is the difference between calling out radical redpillers and radical feminists?

TalkToHusband · 2014-12-15T16:23:53+00:00

The comparison between The Red Pill and feminism is really not a solid one. Feminism as a movement has been around for centuries, with its political influence seeing peaks throughout the 19th and 20th centuries (the abolitionist and prohibitionist movements in the mid 1800’s for example were spearheaded by feminists, with the prominent ones moving to the suffragette movements that led to the Nineteenth Amendment and then the equal pay and equal opportunities pushed for in the sixties and seventies). “Third-wave” feminism has its nut-jobs and certainly lacks the urgency that the first two waves had, but it’s certainly not without any purpose. It’s just the purpose is less tangible than Section IX or the right to vote.

The Red Pill (at least specifically the subreddit) has only been around for about two years (since October 2012, I believe). The “manosphere” as a whole dates back a bit longer, yet still is mainly reactionary to the third-wave of feminism. The problem with your argument is that the feminists that claim “death to all cis-males” and that “E=MC² is sexist” aren’t the prominent members of the movement. Hilary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Whoopi Goldberg, Elizabeth Warren, Danica Patrick, the Williams sisters, Mia Love, Emma Watson, and so on. I’m not a feminist, but I know that those are the more prominent “third-wavers” that the little girls today look up to.

Compare that to the claims that “feminists wish they were hot enough to be rape-able”, or that “…’the age of consent’ being as high as 18 is because of the artificially inflated market society tries to keep for women”, or that “[I] Thoroughly believe all women are crazy, the extent just differs. [I] Thoroughly believe all women are manipulative, the scale and intelligence of said manipulations just varies. [I have] Never met a bitch who wasn't crazy or manipulative”. These beliefs cannot be claimed to be from the “extremes” or the “crazies.” These are the moderators and endorsed contributors to the subreddit. These are highly upvoted comments from the individuals who are either in charge or whose opinions are highly valued.

Perhaps the only difference is time, and in time the rank-and-file of TRP will call out against the concept of “AWALT” or call for the removal of Women: the Most Responsible Teenage in the House from the “Required Theory Reading” section of the sidebar. When that happens, you’ll be able to play the “NARPALT (Not All Red Pillers Are Like That)” card.

hyperrreal · 2014-12-15T16:00:26+00:00

I have had this exact debate with some bluepillers on here, and have not gotten an answer to this. It is not clear to me why it's appropriate to judge TRP by the lowest common denominator, but inappropriate to do so with Feminism.

We should either cut both positions some slack when it comes to 'pop' interpretations of theory, or we should adopt a position that each ideology is only as worthwhile as it is actually understood and interpreted by the majority. Most people, however, are lenient towards their side, and harsh towards the opposition. That's an incoherent stance.

In terms of that essay by Richard Dawkins, it seems a little agenda-driven. The STEM/analytic philosophy crowd has a habit of badly misreading continental texts, and then arguing based on those poor readings that the text in question is meaningless and incoherent. Similar to how continentals often have trouble approaching specific scientific issues.

I have very little experience with Luce Irigaray (the feminist in question), but I don't think Dawkins is giving her enough credit. That's not to say I agree with her, but I don't think he is presenting her argument fairly. Dawkin's treatment of her, Baudrillard, Lacan, etc. reminds of Karl Popper on Hegel. They both come off as people with a score to settle, who have little to no understanding of what they are criticizing.

So I would argue that Dawkins is guilty of exactly what some bluepillers are- allowing himself to be overwhelmed by personal bias, reading texts out of the context and conversation in which they were written, and giving his intellectual opponents much less credit than he gives himself.

pillburt · 2014-12-15T16:15:29+00:00

The problem with calling out red pillers is a fundamental failure to understand the sort of communication that is taking place.

TRP doesn't purport to be a social movement recommending political or even widespread social change, instead it's a small personal philosophy movement recommending personal changes to best effect a favorable outcome.

The communication that takes place gets called out as "misogynistic" or hateful, but these critics completely miss the point of having a place for men to vent- and when you understand just what it is, you'll know why they do it, and why criticizing it won't fix it.

Imagine we were able to record marines talking with each other in a barracks, and transcribe it into text on a subreddit. You'd find them saying some really fucked up shit. Some talking about sluts, having sex, killing people, and other ridiculous things. Lots of machismo, posturing, joking, ribbing, and venting. Hyperbole and letting off steam.

But that's the culture, and that's what takes place behind closed doors.

It's a form of bonding, and a form of group cohesion. It assists with catharsis of the trials of their shared experiences.

What women and blue pillers are attempting to do by "calling out" red pillers is enter into their space, control the speech, and make sure it serves their own personal purposes. By ensuring that some speech isn't allowed and controlling it/steering it in different directions, women can co-opt these men into benefiting them. This is how women operate in the wild, as you see many male spaces become invaded and re-purposed. Anything from male gyms, cigar clubs, online forums- the results are always the same.

Do you know why I would never take their complaints seriously? Because I can't fathom of any sort of male-only group that women wouldn't label misogynistic or bad. That's telling. The fact is, it doesn't matter how much red pillers tempered their speech, message, or language. It would never be enough to appease women until it completely serves them.

And that's why they will never allow even the slightest modification to their speech at the behest of these women. It's a slippery slope.

To criticize feminists makes far more sense. They are not simply trying to vent among themselves in a protected environment. They are trying to pass laws to make illegal my body parts, and condemn me as a rapist until proven innocent. Let feminism burn, I say. They cross over from venting and hyperbole when their hate takes away my freedom and puts me in prison because of the 'patriarchy'.

SquidwardsEuphoria · 2014-12-15T18:33:27+00:00

I think it's the same thing and it's fine either way. If your movement attracts tons of extremist weirdos, it's best to figure out why instead of denouncing them as "not real ___s". When I hear a woman say "oh, man-haters aren't real feminists" it's a total cop-out, same with the guys who say "Sure, SOME guys on TRP believe women are Satan incarnate, but they're betas." Own what your movement has done, regardless of what your movement is. If the extremists are common enough, it's worth thinking about.

manymacoronis · 2014-12-15T18:44:24+00:00

Because TRP is just a fringe reddit group and a handful of other obscure websites. It really can't compare to a movement that is at least a hundred years old, probably several centuries or longer, that affects billions of people. And gaining the right to vote etc. isn't comparable to trying to get laid on Saturday night. The two things aren't remotely on the same level.

You could compare something else unimportant like tumblr to TRP though.

squirrels33 · 2014-12-15T18:44:44+00:00

Since your question is "what is the difference", I don't think there is a major difference. Both TRP and radical/SJW feminism are strong examples of horseshoe theory.

Personally, I spend a lot of time at both /r/TheBluePill and /r/TumblrInAction. I find the content featured on both subs entertaining, if not mildly disturbing at times. I don't think they're mutually exclusive. In fact, I think most people with moderate social views and a sense of humor would enjoy both subs.

XYEaQMZJvS · 2014-12-15T23:49:05+00:00

Because Tumblr SJWs don't typically tell teenage boys that women want to be raped and that if she says no it's just a "shit test."

MissPearl · 2014-12-15T17:25:17+00:00

I think TumblrinAction is a perfectly valid concept. As for why the red pill should be judged by its asshats?

Its a smaller, considerabley more fundamentalist (eg core text focused) philosophy to which there appears (to an outsider) to be considerably less space for deviance and a lot of credit given to a prominent asshat with little internal criticism. Any given RP person generally has to new pretty close to the party line or be ejected, where as there are so many schools of feminism it is able to be in conflict with itself, and so on.

Theoretically I might be innacurate, but I can't see the same cycle of examination and conflict I expect when feminists deal with their own asshats at this time. However given the benefit of the doubt, we shall see what TRP is like in 50 to 100 years.

Precisely speaking judging all persons who care about men's rights by MRA asshats would be a better comparison.

[deleted] · 2014-12-15T15:58:40+00:00

Exactly, both sides are right about one thing: the other should be called out.

egotherapy · 2014-12-15T16:34:59+00:00

It's telling that you don't know Luce Irigaray's name, since she isn't really important in actual feminist academia nowadays. Let's also look past the fact that this assertion about her theories doesn't have any primary sources. Let's be clear here, we don't know when or where she claimed this, or even if she did. But okay. Do scientists and academics sometimes say stupid things? Of course they do! Have you read some of the ideas Freud had?
TRP has also been criticised by r/badhistory, r/badeverything and r/badwomensanatomy and other badacademics subs. Does this make you feel better about TRP being totally legit? Oh, and r/tumblrinaction has also been criticised in r/badhistory.

EaglePout · 2014-12-15T16:10:45+00:00

trp's core tenets about women are derogatory and dehumanizing. Feminisms core tenants about men are that they're capable of being more than the sex-crazed animals older generations saw them as (and TRP still sees them as). The fringe of Feminists believe all men are rapists. The fringe of TRP believes women are actually capable of love, rationality, honor.

Trp isn't concerned with the emotional state of either it's followers or the women it degrades. And what I mean by this is it encourages men not to speak about how they feel to their partner, and instead play mind games. Listening to your partners concerns is see as concession. (Not including guys who are only looking for casual sex, they honestly don't concern me.) men are warned against trusting their partners in marriage, saying they will be bled dry by scheming harpies. this seems like an inherently unhealthy frame of mind to me, being both constantly afraid of rejection from not being "alpha" enough and a lack of trust towards your partner has never a happy relationship made in my experience. As someone with an open and loving relationship, the thought of using power games like trp advocates makes me imagine a very lonely and isolated existence. I don't think human beings were meant to function like that.

TheTerrorSquad · 2014-12-15T16:02:29+00:00

Simple.

Because TRP is comprised of, and represented by, the dregs of the internet.

Feminism is not. The dregs of the internet participate. They don't represent and they don't lead.

There's also republicans, democrats, libertarians- none of these groups are represented and led by a subreddit and collection of blogs.

TRP is, and that is how it is judged.

ArkiF · 2014-12-15T20:20:23+00:00

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/23ini2/til_that_an_influential_feminist_theorist/

The people who wrote the points being commented on in that article were men and women who were psycho-anyalysts and post-modern philosophers (now old or dead).

I don't think that the point of such discourse is meant to be hard science.

No, it doesn't represent the day-to-day business of living in today's world.

Carry on.

winndixie · 2014-12-16T19:45:28+00:00

All the differences in the world

teeelo · 2014-12-15T17:18:20+00:00

Politically incorrect answer: It's personal. Better, they make it personal.

Blue Pill Men are bitter that the girls they like, like Alpha Guys instead. 'Nice Guy' Syndrome.

They can fight this injustice online because they know it just sounds pathetic in public.

Blue Pill Women are the women that Red Pill Men won't be fooled into having relationships with anymore. Often over weight, and generally not attractive, they are bitter they can't take advantage of the passing phase of feminism as much as they used to be able to. They despise the fact that we know they can either live life unfulfilled with their Beta Bux, or fix themselves in an attempt to get the Alpha Fucks. Which is unlikely.

homo_homini_lupus · 2014-12-15T16:46:07+00:00

What does "calling out" even mean?

jacks1000 · 2014-12-15T22:09:05+00:00

The difference is that TheRedPill is some fringe internet forum.

Feminism is a real political movement taken seriously by millions of people and forced upon people through international institutions like the United Nations.

100000nopes · 2014-12-17T03:06:41+00:00

TRP and radical feminists are quite similar in a sense that they mirror each other.

TRP hate women, sure they might like to fuck them, but they don't respect them as individuals that have their own ideas. The exact same thing can be said for feminists. Radfems hate men. Both groups rely on stereotypes.

TRP: women with tattoos are whores, women are over-emotional morons. Their behavior is extremely predictable. radfems: men are rapists, men don't care about women. Their behavior is extremely predictable.

Same thing, opposite sides of the coin.

Title	What is the difference between calling out radical redpillers and radical feminists?
Author	TalkToHusband
Upvotes	3
Comments	229
Date	December 15, 2014 3:35 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2pd6sw/what_is_the_difference_between_calling_out/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/what-is-the-difference-between-calling-out-radical.284098 https://theredarchive.com/post/284098

Comments