Meanwhile, at Cracked.com... More disinformation about TRP

DonVote

June 4, 2014

7 upvotes

Archived from /r/TheRedPill

r/TheRedPill is a subreddit for discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/TheRedPill archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Meanwhile, at Cracked.com... More disinformation about TRP
Author	DonVote
Upvotes	7
Comments	28
Date	June 4, 2014 1:52 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2797z1/meanwhile_at_crackedcom_more_disinformation_about/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/meanwhile-at-crackedcom-more-disinformation-about.229728 https://theredarchive.com/post/229728

[–]HitlersCow8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacks10003 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aphelion33423 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]VivalaVeritas4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When they ran out of material to make lists out of. After that, they did what Jezebel, Yahoo News, and other bullshit generating "news" sites do, they started writing sensationalist headlines, and controversial stories. I honestly can't blame them as this is what mainstream media has devolved into. They're not about journalistic integrity, they're not about comedy, they're not even too much about creativity anymore. They are there to make a profit, and they do this by generating controversy. Every time they write a BS article like this, they polarize people on hot button issues, and create controversy. Controversy=more views/click, more clicks=more money. Simple really, and we (BP/RP subs alike) fall for it every time.

tl;dr- Let's snapshot this BS next time and not support them with our views

[–]dotrar2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deepsouthscoundrel2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]HitlersCow1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alkyjason0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Riotdrone-4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]deepsouthscoundrel3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Riotdrone-5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]TogiBear3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Look at it this way: asking us to respond to this article is like asking /r/atheism to disprove a God. We simply don't have to and even if we tried to, no answer would be good enough.

Plus apparently you guys frown on people who aren't 'part of your community' participating in discussion.

Not true. If anyone posts here that's not a 'part of the community', they're only here for argumentative purposes so they can link our responses to SRS or TwoX.

If you're trying to get information on something related to Elliot Rodgers, TheRedPill is the last place you should be. Elliot Rodgers was BluePill to the core and anyone here can pretty much guarantee that if Elliot took some of the logic here and applied it to his own life, he would have easily gotten laid and he definitely wouldn't have killed anybody.

[–]Riotdrone0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

I sort of see your point but how do you see it that way? What is so wrong about the articles observations? Any answer is good enough for me as long as you address things in the article, I'm just trying to figure out what/how you guys think. Of course you don't have to if you don't want to.

Yeah I'm getting big red "Please do not comment or vote if you are not part of this community" over my comments. I don't want to subscribe out of ideological reasons but I'm certainly not here to argue. I was just curious to see some responses to criticisms.

I admit I'm not familiar with the tenets of the redpill ideology and you definitely shouldn't have to explain it to me when I can do research about it on my own. But, correct me if I'm wrong, Rodgers espoused a lot of sentiments I notice coming from places like this. Blaming his relationship problems on some model of the nature of women in general. I want to understand the conclusion made that all the problems one might have with women can all be blamed on women themselves or your lack of understanding of women. Am I overreaching?

For example my experience has been treat women as you'd treat anyone else, take them at their word, don't be presumptuous, be open and honest, avoid insecurity and just generally speaking practice common human decency and respect. Mostly importantly I guess is just trying to begin with, forcing yourself to talk up girls you like despite nerves. Practice works for getting better at mostly everything I've found, women being no exception. This has worked for me since my awkward middle school years, I mean I could always be doing better but I've been in relationships/casually dating women since and I'm 22 now. Despite the differences between sexes I don't see any 'secret formula' for getting/treating women that works across the board for everyone regardless of most things. I mean I'm in the middle of a couple month dry spell but then again I haven't tried at all to pursue anyone during this time; still for the moment enjoying my independence after the last relationship.

[–]TogiBear3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

#5. They Prey on the Insecure (With Misdirection)

They disagree with the fundamental beliefs of TRP because it points out the hidden nature of women, and how to manipulate the system to their advantage.

After being subscribed to TRP for a few months, I know what I have to do to find a quality mate, and how to keep her around. It's a win-win for everyone but people tend to hate what they don't understand. If I don't see a certain woman as relationship material, I let her know that I keep her around only for sex until I find a quality girl. If she fucks up, she's gone and I never speak to her again.

#4. They Hate Women Because It Justifies Their Suffering

We don't hate women. We understand them. Know the difference.

Many new RedPillers hate their exes for dumping them, cheating on them, or taking their house and kids, but they haven't realized yet that they reached that situation as a result of their own actions.

#3. Their Enemy is Everyone

The point they make here is that one person used homophobic slurs (really, who doesn't), and stating if you're not RedPill, then you're BluePill, which is partly true.

Many men don't know how the system works, so when the tests come up, they naturally fuck up and let women walk all over them because our culture dictates that men treat women like princesses.

If you treat a woman like a princess, she will not have any respect for you at all and she will leave you or cheat on you, likely both. If you've been by /r/deadbedrooms, you'll notice that the men proclaim that "I gave her everything she wanted!" and they don't understand why that's a bad thing. I made the same mistake, she dumped me and hasn't spoken to me this day despite the fact that we were really great friends.

#2. They Have No Sense of Consequence

Proclaim that RedPill thinks "some women deserve to die" then links to a deleted comment with 3 upvotes and 2 downvotes.

Proclaim that since some men told women they love them to get in their pants, they must all be RedPillers since they hate women!

#1. They Don't Have a Real Position (and They Don't Care)

Brings up the fact that MRAs are hate groups because some random law center pointed out that many men are enraged (they're damn right to be in many cases, especially ones concerning legal) so it must be a valid fact because some guy with a Ph.D said so.

What do all of these points have in common? They are uninformed.

Blaming his relationship problems on some model of the nature of women in general. I want to understand the conclusion made that all the problems one might have with women can all be blamed on women themselves or your lack of understanding of women. Am I overreaching?

Men are different from women. Most men want a companion that he can treat like his best friend, always be there for her and expect her to do the same and women just aren't like that. They are biologically programmed to seek out alpha male behavior because that gives her offspring the best chance of survival. Just because we're the most intelligent animal doesn't mean that we don't have animalistic instincts. The reason TRP teaches you to be more alpha is because that's what women are attracted to, by nature. Never show weakness, and she won't lose attraction for you.

Elliot tried to be a nice guy, and women never gave him any attention. Combine mental issues with sexual frustration and this is what you get. So yes, Elliot hated what he didn't understand.

For example my experience has been treat women as you'd treat anyone else, take them at their word, don't be presumptuous, be open and honest, avoid insecurity and just generally speaking practice common human decency and respect.

You're on the right track, but never take women at their word. Judge them by their actions, as the two are entirely divergent.

You don't have to be an asshole. Being an asshole gives the false presumption that you're strong. All you have to do is be true to your word and never let her walk on you. Call her out on her shit because you're a man, and that's why you've graced her with your presence,instead of the other way around.

TL;DR: Be her rock.

[–]Riotdrone0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for responding. I responded to some red pill tenets further down if you want to read but my conclusion is there's a lot of wrong or misleading information going around here.

If the bottom line is just don't be insecure, stand up for yourself and take care of your business then all I can say is of course. I don't think you need Red Pill to tell you that, it's a given as attractive across the board regardless of gender. But these unnecessary claims made about the innate psychology of women I just can't see replicated in reality and come off as, at the very least, resentful.

I'd love to see a scientifically based Red Pill where instead of ideas being thrown out there without any evidence as 'truths' by anonymous entities on the internet that may tempting to a disenfranchised group of people there is actual serious and informed discussion of gender differences. I'd love to see a group of anthropologists, historians, psychologists, discussing these things and I think they'd be the ones most qualified to come up with a general consensus. A consensus of resentful, marginalized, disenfranchised people who are struggling with the same thing I can't see as being very accurate. I'd be afraid that there'd be too much potential for hivemind rhetoric and circle jerking and not enough for actual education and progress. It just seems suspicious that a group of men who have a hard time finding relationships/dates get together on the internet and the problem ends up being that women are just inherently flawed.

[–]DeckofLuckyStrikes-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LAMFF 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Riotdrone0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LAMFF -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NumberWangBot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Riotdrone0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

The five stages is interesting I guess but I'm still confused over what the original 'revelation' is about women.

On the other post I have some questions. All the points there seem to just be thrown out there with barely any evidence and I fear it might just be to appeal to people who want to believe these things. It seems a little paradoxical to claim that women want to get opportunities based on their beauty but don't want to be judged harshly by their appearance. If someone actually believes this I'd think they just have cognitive bias in that regard. Which now that I think about it is actually fairly common in my experience regardless of sex. Who doesn't want to have their cake and eat it too?

I guess that ties into the second point which claims logic is not a woman's modus operandi. This is an anecdotal point I'm about to make but it's based off of anecdotal statements, I don't see any studies or research linked to prove any of the points in this post. My second girlfriend was a born scientist, she thinks she is destined to work at the CDC and combat antibiotic resistant bacteria, and judging from the amount of scholarships she's obtained and the amount of work I've seen her do she is. She was a very passionate person and certainly very emotional but I distinctly remember she'd always have a way during bad arguments or fights we'd have of bringing up points about our long term future and her hopes in a neutral way. She was incredibly mature and consistently surprised and impressed me by being able to put any immediate quarrel we were having in a bigger context or perspective even when I was maybe even too heated to see it that clearly. That experience alone along with dating a would be lawyer who was very similarly logical and even headed seem to completely discount this point for me.

Another thing about this as well as a lot of other things in that post is that I feel like most of the statements made have to do mainly with gender roles and stereotypes from a bygone era more than innate psychology. Women were marginalized to an extreme extent until very recently not having any political/social power for most of our history across many civilizations. They had to use their beauty and femininity because that was literally all the power/value they had in society and we built traditional gender roles based on that history. Thankfully that age is long gone in America, at least in NYC, but I can see how these roles will take a while to be bred out of society. American culture and society is far different from what it was even back in the 1980s with regards to gender equality and power. I think it's very wrong to say for instance that society will always have a safety net for women. The societal lines between man and women have been blurring together at an increasing rate and pretty soon I don't think there will be a mentality that agrees with any sort of gender specific safety net, outside of physiological areas like men's prostate health or women's reproductive cycle, from young generations growing up a new world. Just look at how transgender people, possibly the longest marginalized group in western civilization, are being brought into mainstream acceptance and care. My mom babysat this kid once who just the other month in middle school came out as gay, we already knew, and his classmates completely accepted him. I remember even back when I was his age children taunting others as gay or sissy. You can see the disintegration of other biases or stereotypes in younger generations in things like race as well. Children are taught to be homophobic, racist or sexist, it's society that molds them this way because you can see them embrace these things as simply the way people are, which is just plain true, given the chance.

About hypergamy. You should see the slovenly hipsters around here who have literally nothing going for them in the traditional sense picking up gorgeous career chicks left and right. In fact I know of two couples older than me who have gotten married and the man basically fulfills the traditional role of a housewive to take care of children/home and be generally be an eye pleasing hunk for the hard working lady. Though more often than not in this economy both couples take jobs. I mean I experienced in my 'trouble years' that girls love a rebel, maybe not long term but I don't think I would stay with someone either who keeps making the same mistakes or doesn't have any future prospects or hopes unless I was in love with them and that would be hard to see/maintain. I was in love once and it was hard, it's not a magical thing that appears out of no where for no reason like in the movies in my experience. It starts with some immediate inherent bond/attraction and grows or dies based on how compatible two people are. I'd think any logical person has hypergamous instincts to some degree, what's not to like about elevating your social status higher than you currently are?

Actually you know I really don't feel like responding to all of these. It seems like it's a baseless philosophy made up to appeal to a certain disenfranchised group of people. There's some good advice for socially awkward people like exercise, don't cry in front of women you like, don't come off as desperate/insecure. The other half however about how women are only good for looks and not meant for logic and intellectual pursuits is just plain wrong. Lot's of strange unsubstantiated claims being made like how it's just a given in this ideology that 20% of men are having sex with 80% of women. I just don't see that. A lot of this reminds me of how someone like Alex Jones for example might highlight some interesting societal issue and then jump to a conclusion involving prison camps and death squads instead of the simplest and most likely answer. And then a lot of it might make sense in a archetypal movie/tv universe but I just don't experience these things in reality. I can't imagine attracting any real connections/relationships/love from seeing the world this way and trying to structure all my actions accordingly. As corny as it sounds it'd be much easier and I'd much rather just be myself, take risks, make mistakes, grow from it and improve and just generally behave in accordance with what comes naturally to me to attract someone who truly loves who I am.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually you know I really don't feel like responding to all of these. It seems like it's a baseless philosophy made up to appeal to a certain disenfranchised group of people.

You have spent maybe a fraction of a day reading some simplified summaries of what this subreddit is about. There is a lot of content on the sidebar that you may be interested in reading, but I don't expect anybody to come here and fully grasp the concept within a matter of days.

There's some good advice for socially awkward people like exercise, don't cry in front of women you like, don't come off as desperate/insecure. The other half however about how women are only good for looks and not meant for logic and intellectual pursuits is just plain wrong.

That is incorrect, and you have a long way to go. Maybe it's not the right time in your life for the red pill, but I can assure you, it is ultimately about learning to respect yourself as a man so you don't outwardly project your hate onto the women who reject you. Game and self improvement is a large part of that, but again, there is a lot of content that I simply do not have the time to summarize for you.

[–]jacks10001 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Riotdrone-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Comments