~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
DamiensLust
[removed]
[–]NeoreactionSafe 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
"The Manipulated Man" is without a doubt an excellent work.
It goes into detail where the beta mindset and lack of Game awareness lead men into situations where women exploit them.
To my knowledge there are no errors in it.
Are you Blue Pill now or are you just considering taking the Red Pill?
The Red Pill basically exposes the "crime" we call Feminism and permits men to develop into their full masculine potential through what we call Frame and Game. Frame can be seen as internal Freedom and Game is much like the Liberty to act towards your own benefit.
Most ordinary young men today have their consciousness suppressed by the Blue Pill which is the emotional indoctrination (brainwashing) that is being forced into you by the tv, schools, etc.
So Red Pill simply "releases" that suppression and allows natural masculine polarity to develop.
A Blue Pill "beta" is seen as androgynous and having failed to polarize into masculinity.
[–]DamiensLust[S] -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I don't know if we're talking about the same book. The Manipulated Man offers no recourse to men, it merely serves to illuminate how women have set up a system to exploit men without them realizing it. It doesn't talk about game or lack of frame at all, and it isn't from a feminist-centric point of view - the whole book is about the advantages that the "typical" domestic housewife gets from the exploitative, parasitic relationship with a man she's married. Honestly, from your reply, it really seems as if you haven't read the book at all. Whilst all that you're saying are concepts that I 100% agree with, like the need to have game awareness, frame, the idioc of feminism, red pill > blue pill etc, these are concepts not even touched upon in "The Manipulated Man". The only part of your post that was even remotely relevant to the book was where you mentioned emotional indoctrination, which the book proposes is a process initiated by mothers and continued throughout every institution of society to enable women to efficiently exploit men. But hoenstly, the entirety of the rest of your post is nothing to do with what the book is about. I don't know if maybe you haven't actually read the book but have just tried to assume what it is about, or if maybe you skimmed the book and got your synopsis wrong, or if maybe you read it alongside a lot of the other theory and so got it mixed together in your mind or what, but your post does not suggest any knowledge of what the book is actually about.
[–]CTsunami 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Don't the rules say don't post until you've read the entire sidebar?
[–]NeoreactionSafe 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"The Manipulated Man" can be seen as like the prequel to our current age and was written (I think) about 50 years ago.
"The Misandry Bubble" acts like a sequel to the Red Pill in that it predicts that the "bubble" of Feminism is doomed to collapse eventually.
The Red Pill is about current events, discussions, theory, etc.
We spend most of our time discussing the present.
[–]Rasalom72 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link
1) Your formatting is shit.
2) This shit, and all questions belong in ASKtrp.
3) Look at the author and the year it was written.
4) You're welcome.
[–]Auphor_Phaksache 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I hate when people don't read the year a book was written. That's the first step in gaining context on what every other word after it says.
[–]Benny757 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Indeed, the whole post reads like one long convoluted "shit test." I am pondering the application of "agree and amplify," or maybe amused mastery would work best in reply?? Oh my, what to choose?!
[+]DamiensLust[S] -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I get that it was written in the 70s, I was just asking a simple question about if you guys take it as gospel. you think im giving you a shit test? You think that another dude who's trying to take the Red Pill is giving you a shit test? Are you serious?
[–]DamiensLust[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
"You're formatting is shit"
lol
[–]Rasalom72 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
FTFY... thanks for pointing that out.
[–]DamiensLust[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Don't thank me you moron, I was pointing out your idiotic hypocrisy in trying to insult my formatting when you're making stupid schoolboy errors like that.
[–]Rasalom72 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh really? I must have missed that.... I guess your lack of any point other then "lol" must have gone right over my head...
Either that, or I got what you were implying and ignored you with some AM, as there is a huge difference between formatting and a typo....
Choose which ever answer you think is less moronic (FWIW, I don't care which you choose).
[–]NameOfAction 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Did a period kill your family? Cause you seem to hate them.
[+]DamiensLust[S] -11 points-10 points-9 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I know this is anathema to you guys here on this board, but I'm pretty high on opiates at the moment and when I'm under the influence of them my posts tend to get rambly and disorganized and my grammar takes a hit.
[–]RedLavaLamp 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In that case don't post while your high.
[–]WhySoRuff 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The point of that book was not to show how things got that way, because men didn't even realize what was happenning in the first place.
It Is simply showing what games women play to control men in 1971.
Asking for the evolutionary perspective is the why, and TRP's search feature can help you with that.
[–]DamiensLust[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Thank you, I shall bear that in mind. However, it does bring up some questions for me in how modern women fit into this framework laid out by Villar. As the book explains, women have been manipulating men into a life of servitude for generations with a process of indoctrination beginning in childhood that has the ultimate aim of the women living vacuous lives as housewives and leeching off of their husbands for their life of relative luxury. If this is women's ideal, then where does third wave feminism fit into this? Where do all these women fighting for equal jobs & equal pay in the workplace fit into this? As Villar explains, women had reached the apex of their ideal by manipulating men to support them. Why would women themselves suddenly change that?
[–]WhySoRuff 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
"The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is 'What does a woman want?'" - Sigmund Freud
[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
'What does a woman want?'
I've stopped caring. If they can't articulate what they want, it's not my problem.
Whereas if they can articulately and concisely explain exactly what it is they want... it's still not my problem.
[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
women fighting for equal jobs & equal pay
Ah, no. Women are complaining and whining for unequal jobs ("IT, yes please! Garbage collection... ewww no thanks") and unequal pay ("I want more pay even though I negotiate badly and take more time off and work less hard, and no matter how much pay I get I'm still going to misquote outdated statistics")
If this is women's ideal, then where does third wave feminism fit into this?
Getting a toy job means she can ride the cock carousel for longer in a big city.
As Villar explains, women had reached the apex of their ideal by manipulating men to support them. Why would women themselves suddenly change that?
Well, this all depends on how you look at it.
50 years ago, it was HARD for a woman to raise a family. It needed a family unit. It needed a lot of work from the woman. (No mod cons, no microwave,washer,fridge,freezer,dishwasher, clothes more expensive, education more expensive, food more expensive and FIVE children to raise). Marriage was a reasonable partnership to achieve that.
Women getting a job now rather than settling down young... honestly I have no idea. I guess they tell themselves that that's what they want, and other women tell them that's the strong/independent thing to do. They try it for a few years, realise it's actually really hard, and then opt out, have a kid or two, and then dick around for the rest of their lives as far as I can tell - leaving them plenty of time to go on twitter and complain about how being supported by a man is somehow unfair on her.
[–]idgaf- 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hey I read the book and I can see where you're coming from.
It's not satire. The language does cut hard if you are blue-pilled and stuck in a "women are wonderful" mindset. Many times I said to myself "what a ridiculous statement... but you know... if it were true... I could probably find many examples that would support it."
Any blanket statement about women or men isn't meant to be taken literally or 100% true, there is just too much individual variation and circumstance. The book is also 40 years old.
But by keeping the book's worldview in mind, and offering it consideration, we can look around in our own lives and slowly find more and more examples of how there are entrenched ideas and institutions that transfer power and resources from men to women.
By seeing how an idea or institution is not to our benefit, we can avoid them.
Similar to "AWALT", it's not literally 100% true but it means something similar to "All Guns Are Loaded".
[–]redolas 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, it's not a book for kids on opiates. Try Narnia.
Or, get sobered up, fix your grammar, and throw in some paragraphs. Then maybe we'll take you seriously.
[–]daddymonsterpoodle 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Love it or hate it, so long as it made you think. Welcome to the red pill. As with everything in life question everything. There are a lot of really helpful guys on here. There are some reallyangry guys on here. There are a few internet warriors as well. Some of the guys on here are just tired of repeating the same answers. What does connect all 140,000 men on here is that they all have a good reason to think that something is wrong with society and the red pill seems to provide answers that make sense.
Be specific in your points rather than waffling.
Your post will soon be deleted for now following posting guidelines, but before that happens:
I mean one enormous aspect that I feel is lacking here for a comprehensive and rational view of male-female relationships is that any kind of evolutionary perspective is entirely lacking,
Well covered here on TRP.
No one book will cover everything, that's why the sidebar doesn't say "read this one book and you'll have all the answers".
Now, go away and read the formatting guidelines again.
[–]SteeleLion1 points 10 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
First of all, nothing you ever read should you consider gospel.
[–]explorer93 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I like to consider redpill as an extremity. And with any extremity you must take with a grain of salt. For example. Taking Nihilism or Spirituality as gosepl would be just as dangerous as taking Redpill theory as gospel.
Redpill definitely sheds some light in the dark when you really need it. And is fundamentally true in many aspects. But anomalys in the social world do exist and should be treated as so.
[–]Redpass2122 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
After reading that book and swallowing TRP. I realized how much of a beta I am, and how no one gives a crap about men
[–]Icaria25 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm with you on some of this. The book is very generalistic and bring AWALT to an extreme i would refrain from, and adds little value after that.
I think the reason it's relevant is because it's written by a female author and is absolutely mysognistic. It serves as a warning, it doesn't really explain things in a useful way but express a reality today repressed, which serves as an introduction to gender reality. ( Some, % depending on nurture and culture ) women can be good humang beings with care and sympathy but not to grown children. What i think this book does better is it shows you the horrors a woman can bring into your life if you are naive. The more you lead yourself and have solid boundaries, the better they will behave. They are reactive in nature.
I don't blame the author for the bias though, women don't know what make them good so if she had a good christian relationship in a very degraded area, everything she says could have been objective related to her life.
[–]Tie5o11 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Besides your formatting which is very difficult to read, I would say this post would have been much stronger if you took specific examples, theories, or points the author made and provided your counterpoints. I personally have not read the book, so have no comment either way, but that is how I would encourage approaching these types of topics in the future.
I perfectly agree with being critical of all information you take in- even if you are predisposed to agree with it and/or it supports your point of view. But you failed to make any sort of case other than "it is unbelievable".
[–]Weedwin31 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Men we don't give a fuck about what you think or believe, the real deal is there, she was fucking right about everything she said, the beautiful thing about this book is that the truth was written by a woman
[–]DamiensLust[S] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Haha holy shit this sub is so hostile it's insane. Here I was literally just asking questions and I get a bunch of outraged responses with a "how dare you" tone to them. I didn't realize it was a cardinal sin here to ask questions and try and independently think about the information you guys are peddling. If this is how you respond to someone asking innocent questions about a book from the 1970s, I dread to think the response anyone gets if they question your main theories.
At the end of the day, the truth of the matter is is that if someone is confident in their ideas then they welcome the spotlight being bought on them, because they are sure that they are right and that logic & facts are on their side. When people get rabidly defensive & angry as soon as their tenets are questioned, that sets alarm bells ringing immediately.
I just hope that you don't represent what most of the guys here are like. I mean fucking hell your username is literally "Weed win". What are you, 14 years old? If some fucking adolescent idiot stoner fits right in around here then maybe this aint the place I was thinking it was.
[–]Reddened 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree that some of the responses are hostile and I'm not a fan of that sort of reply, but what you don't seem to be aware of is that your post was somewhat hostile as well.
A lot of people are subscribed to this sub and believe in its material, so when you make a post that questions TRP as a whole based on a single book you can see how that might make some people defensive. I'm not saying I support the hostility but:
"if everything in this book is considered to be completely true and these are the principles on which this sub is based, then I can instantly tell that I will find most of it, like the book, similarlly unbelievable."
This is where you got people's backs up. If you want to discuss the validity of the book cool, discourse is good, but the comments generalizing TRP as a whole weren't necessary and came off like an accusation rather than a genuine desire to gain clarification.
[–][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]DamiensLust[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
lol okay. I question the 100% validity of a book from the 1970s that doesn't even incorporate basic ideas about biology & evolution when deigning to explain all male-female relationships and that obviously makes me a woman. Everything I've heard from The Red Pill so far has seemed to make total sense to me and I've agreed with completely. But this book is at least hyperbolic.
I mean "Most adult male men live in a state of permanent hell" Seriously!? I mean between the natural alphas, the rich guys, the celebrities, the gay guys, the attractive guys, the disabled/mentally ill, the guys who live in poorer countries who aren't subjected to the modern western woman's stupid shit and live closer to the natural order of male/female relationships, the guys who are just too plain stupid to realize their life objectively sucks & the guys who are blissfully ignorant, there's already a huge amount of guys who are certainly not living in "permanent hell". I think that whilst there is a lot of useful shit in this book and that its great for forcing a perspective change on blue-pilled guys, that the author just didn't think out a lot of the statements she made (like that one I just quoted). All I was saying is that I don't think the book is fucking gospel is all. This little discussion is probably redundant though, I doubt you've even read the book yourself. Just jump in the thread and throw a buzzword at me without even explaining how it remotely applies to my post why don't you.
[–]AlerioX 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Are you kidding me? Der dressierte Mann (The Manipulated Man) was my introduction to the red pill. I never heard of the Red Pill when I first read this book. At this time I was part of the pick up community. I picked this book up on amazon and read it in one day. Just like you I found some statements ridiculous but only because I was too much of an average german blue pilled refugees welcome cuckold to understand the deeper sense of this masterpiece. Go read it again. Then read all the other stuff on the sidebar. And then read it again. I'm sure you will get it when the blue pilled propaganda is flushed down the toilet because you face the reality.
[–]Hammerway 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
TRP is like a buffet, take what you want/need right now, leave the rest. Who knows, maybe in a few months time you'll come back and take something else? You're not forced to believe in anything, quite the contrary, the sub encourages independent thinking. It's a good idea to lurk a little bit and read top posts from all the time, you'll be able to form your own opinion as to what we're about. As for your question, no single book is The Bible of this sub.
Thank you for your reasonable & intelligent response. People like you are who will keep me coming back to this sub. Responses like "this is one big shit test, wondering how I should handle this" treating me like I'm a fucking woman for asking a simple question is really fucking ridiculous, but you have restored my faith in this sub. Thanks.
[–]Auphor_Phaksache 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dude stop taking it so personal. Guys give each other shit. Especially online and especially in this sub. You don't think guys test other guys? Same principles apply, control yourself and your emotions. In other words... Frame.
[–]HAMMURABl 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
honestly said, no one here gives a fuck what you think about this sub or whether you come back here, as you contribute nothing.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]NeoreactionSafe 19 points20 points21 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] -5 points-4 points-3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]CTsunami 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]NeoreactionSafe 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rasalom72 11 points12 points13 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Auphor_Phaksache 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Benny757 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]DamiensLust[S] -7 points-6 points-5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rasalom72 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Rasalom72 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NameOfAction 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]DamiensLust[S] -11 points-10 points-9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RedLavaLamp 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]WhySoRuff 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]WhySoRuff 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]idgaf- 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]redolas 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]daddymonsterpoodle 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SteeleLion1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]explorer93 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Redpass2122 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Icaria25 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tie5o11 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Weedwin31 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Reddened 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AlerioX 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hammerway 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DamiensLust[S] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Auphor_Phaksache 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAMMURABl 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link