Can we stop with the wide sweeping generalizations? Leave your baggage at the door.

Nemester · 2013-11-26T16:22:24+00:00

Fuck you concern troll. Generalizations are perfectly valid for describing groups of people. You can take your NAWALT arguments and shove them.

throwaway1643 · 2013-11-26T15:21:37+00:00

It's not a question of morality, it's a question of evolutionary biology.

The basic premise is that,

(i) our behavioral response in social situations has been directed to some extent by evolutionary pressures.

(ii) Women have MUCH MUCH easier access to sex. Therefore, to make sure they only have sex with the highest quality men, there are certain characteristics they are almost universally attracted to (i.e, dark triad traits, dominance, high wealth) and very specific behavioral cues they employ (e.g., shit tests, trying to flake to gauge your response/value, etc.).

When you've been aware for long enough, you'll see the exact same cues/interaction patterns happen time and time again in social interactions.

(iii) So, instead of making pronouncements on morality, I think the redpill strives to accept this as a consequence of biology; instead we try to accept human behavior for what it is and then identify the types of behavior that maximize OUR chances as men in getting what we want (i.e, being alpha).

LMS_THEORY_ · 2013-11-26T15:25:30+00:00

Morality has nothing to do with it. It's women inability to realize the ARE wrong, that they AREN'T that great, and men WEREN'T put on this earth to validate your entire being.

What's the problem with those truths?

TorontoMike · 2013-11-26T17:13:29+00:00

Well this is a general forum rather then a scientific paper. I understand where you are coming from that on the surface that it looks like we are making sweeping generalities about women ( and some are ) but the majority are just speaking off hand and not bothering to qualify / quantify what their speaking about because it would take up 3/4 of the post and would be a wall of text and the majority understand that they are not saying all women are this..... the majority of us are adults and understand the unspoken qualifier to that statement . We know that blanket statements are not true, and know all women are not X - we look beyond that to the rpoblem or observations.

other forums or people on the street can get away with saying the same statements, ( Democrats think that ..... / video gamers like .....) it is just because we are speaking of women that it is sensitive and the false cries of "Oh the misogyny!!"

ar10308 · 2013-11-26T18:17:38+00:00

Generalizations are functional. Men have no difficulty understanding that there are always exceptions, but require generalizations for function.

Women are solipsistic and don't care about function and always want to make it about how they are the exception.

Solipsism is why we can't have nice things.

Title	Can we stop with the wide sweeping generalizations? Leave your baggage at the door.
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	0
Comments	5
Date	November 26, 2013 2:49 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1rhwov/can_we_stop_with_the_wide_sweeping/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/can-we-stop-with-the-wide-sweeping-generalizations.8266 https://theredarchive.com/post/8266

Comments