~ archived since 2018 ~

The Ideal World

Spartacus321 · 2013-10-14T02:35:03+00:00

Bluepillers and Redpillers alike; what is your ideal interaction between men and women? If the current situation was satisfactory, there would be no RP, so...

Spartacus321

October 14, 2013

11 upvotes

/r/PurplePillDebate

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	The Ideal World
Author	Spartacus321
Upvotes	11
Comments	88
Date	October 14, 2013 2:35 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1oecgg/the_ideal_world/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/the-ideal-world.286705 https://theredarchive.com/post/286705

Comments

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago* (76 children) | Copy Link

That question deserves an essay answer, but since no one would read that I'll try to condense.
First of all I'd like to do away with the whole "female sexuality is taboo" as a social norm. (that encompasses sexualization of breast feeding, placing judgement on women who have many partners, forcing abstinence on teen girls and instilling the belief they're only as pure as their vaginas are, etc)
-
Then, break down basic gender roles, so for example dads wont get the stink-eye at the park when they're with their children, and women won't be vilified for being in the office rather than with the kids...
As far as interactions between the genders goes..... I'd prefer that no one would treat another as like a.... a science experiment. The whole PUA movement is really surreal in my mind.
-
Also, people wouldn't automatically rate your entire worth immediately by how 'fuckable' you are. It certainly happens to men, but on a lesser extent compared to women.
(One example stands out in my mind was those Wendy's commercials, the first ones featured the actual "Wendy", but she was older and a little pudgy. And people got pretty vindictive towards her. Like... weirdly so. I never saw anyone get up in arms about her dad being in commercials, and he was plenty portly himself. I'll have to try to find some examples.)

*edit: grammar r hard.

[–]Canned_Wine1999 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

First of all I'd like to do away with the whole "female sexuality is taboo" as a social norm. (that encompasses sexualization of breast feeding, placing judgement on women who have many partners, forcing abstinence on teen girls and instilling the belief they're only as pure as their vaginas are, etc)

I was about to write something to this effect when it got me thinking, this isn't to generalize everyone that subscribes to that stuff, but it seems trp and pua types that are most defensive of and rigid followers of their world view are terrified of the idea of a truly liberated human sexuality instead of roles conforming to the constructs they're most familiar with and utilize, that if we did away with socially constructed gender roles women would flock to have sex with a small portion of "alpha males" and there would be none left for the rest, including themselves, like I really think that lies at the core of their beliefs, that women only have sex with certain, less manly men to acquire something, and that human sexuality would revert into some sort of primeval harem structure where only the manliest of men get any and all else are excluded from the fun. Anyone wanna weigh in on this?

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Canned_Wine1994 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I actually saw a video earlier today that touched on this; TRP is of the opinion that marriage is something that helped society function. "Betas" got a guaranteed mate due to marriage, which kept women from becoming part of an alpha's harem. This made men want to contribute to society, since they were getting something out of it, and that's what lead to modern society being so successful and technologically advanced; the participation of the beta males.

So, if you look at if from TRP's perspective, having people have sex freely, forgoing marriage (or at least waiting much later), and making things harder for beta males literally is a threat to society. Hence their adhesion to gender roles and old values.

Edit: Found the video. It's long and I don't remember what time this particular point is at, but either way it's an interesting video to watch if you're interested.

[–]TRP_0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa16 points17 points18 points 12 years ago (43 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Canned_Wine1995 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

one would undoubtedly end up either slapped, punched, and/or charged with sexual harassment if they took that approach.

I seriously doubt that. For the red pillers who love their anecdotes, I have a number of friends who literally do this and haven't had a violent reaction.

I think what happens when people get slapped or charged with sexual harassment is when they don't take no for an answer. So asking a woman if they want to go back to yours for sex will usually, at most, result in a rejection. If someone continues badgering and pissing off someone who has clearly stated they're not keen, then they will inevitably meet some harsher consequences.

This is partly why red pillers have so many negative experiences with women - they think a rejection is a woman playing "hard to get", or "token resistance", and their solution is a brute force method where they attempt to push through it.

[–]Emby6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

the society we live in encourages the mentality of treating women as objects

Women are not objectified any more than men are. Men and women are objectified in different ways and for different reasons. You just don't notice or care when it's done to men, or you put on a facade of caring as a way of pushing your ideology (for example, by saying, "no seriously, this is why we need more feminism")

The truth is, PUA for women does exist. That's the answer to cipahs' question. PUA for women has existed for millennia. It's so well entwined with our culture that you don't even notice it.

Of course, a big part of the reason you don't notice it is that there is no advocacy group raising your awareness of it. Nobody calls it immoral when women do it (and just to clarify, I don't think it is immoral). You have grown up in a feminist culture. All your life, you've been fed their narrative. That's why you see the things you see.

[–]fhqwhgads_ 9 points9 points9 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZackcidCrimson Pill0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How are men sexually objectified?

Who said they were? If you'd quote the portion of my post that you're responding to, it'd be easier to stay on track.

What is PUA for women? Do you have examples?

Sure. Every person, man or woman, evaluates potential mates and decides how attractive they are. "Pickup" is about identifying those things and altering things about yourself so as to appear more attractive. It's a two-step process:

(1) identify a trait or behavior that you think the opposite sex finds attractive.

(2) determine how to develop that trait, how to execute that behavior, or how to fake it.

PUAs say things like, "I believe that (1) women are attracted to confidence. Therefore I will (2) fake confidence until I actually am confident."

Meanwhile, women say things like, "I believe that (1) men are attracted to signals of health and youth. Therefore I will (2) use makeup so that my skin appears younger and fix my hair to accentuate my health."

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

I think you're conflating sexualisation with objectification. The two can overlap but they are not the same thing. Sexualisation is simply emphasising a superficial aspect of attraction in a person or group and can be an entirely healthy thing. Objectification is more when a person or group gets reduced to the status of non-human; an object.

This can be done through presenting that person or group purely as a sexualised thing - for example, if the majority of women you see in the media, billboards, advertising, etc, are sexualised then you start treating them as sexual things. If, on the other hand, this sexualised image was interspersed with treating them as humans and more complex individuals (like images of men who are intelligent, powerful, cunning, clever, etc) then there is no objectification.

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No one's saying a solution has to be found RIGHT NOW, but supporting / endorsing negative views like the PUA movement is kind of an assbackwards way of solving an issue.

I don't disagree. For the sake of argument, I'll agree with your assertion for a moment that PUA has negative views. If the people using PUA agree that it has negative views and use it anyway (let's say this is the case) then they either aren't the type that are going to care about solving an issue, or they don't care/know how to solve it. This is just my personal opinion, but I think a lot of the PUA's, RPers are the guys saying "This is how it is so I'm gonna do what I gotta do to make the best of it." They're essentially saying they're going to be King Shit of Turd Mountain.

I think the only way you'll see these guys change their tactics/views is if there's a societal shift in how the dating/mating game is played.

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphabetmodamused modstery0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]am_thro_way3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]angatar_5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]fhqwhgads_ 6 points6 points6 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]am_thro_way1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]spechickdon't take pills from strangers.2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Canned_Wine19914 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]angatar_7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]am_thro_way5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]am_thro_way2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]am_thro_way2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]am_thro_way1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (67 children) | Copy Link

I'm confused by your question, OP.

If the current situation was satisfactory, there would be no RP

There are two questions you could be asking.

How would you characterize the perfect world to live in?

Men and women are equal. All are equally responsible for their actions, held to the same standards, and treated equally.

I know, crazy, but I am egalitarian at heart.

2.How would you describe the ideal way to navigate the current world and men/women interactions AS IS?

The red pill. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I wouldn't use game if it didn't work.

If women stopped exhibiting hypergamy (10-20% of guys share all the women / relationships), and either decided they were ok being stay-at-home moms or decided unanimously to be as career-focuses as men, and the whole feminist 'victimization' was put to an end, this world would be very different.

Unfortunately we do not live in this world.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I see that "10-20%" number thrown around a lot and it's very difficult for me to take it seriously. Where does it come from?

the number itself is from the Pareto principle, though it is obviously more complex
Personal observation (being on both sides of this thanks to GAME)
Studies that show higher variability in male sexuality than female sexuality to explain why STDs are more prevalent in women - because all the women sleep with the few STD-ridden guys, while the STD-free guys are more likely abstinent
studies that show how women have sex sooner and more frequently than their 'average' male counterpart, and have more average partners per year

That's a little silly, asking for a unanimous course of action from ~50% of the population, isn't it? Women are going to choose different paths, just like men will.

Well, shit, if only feminists could come to this conclusion.

Less than 50% women in college, medical school, law school, and among elected officials? Must be sexism! Telling women they don't have the option to stay at home and leave the workforce? Must be sexism!

I want one or the other:

stay at home moms are OK, and that means CEOs and shit are necessarily going to be male-dominated, and people stop bitching about that.
stay at home moms are not OK and women start pulling their own weight in dirty jobs like garbage men and utilities workers.

Pick one?

[–]polyhooly7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Studies that show higher variability in male sexuality than female sexuality to explain why STDs are more prevalent in women - because all the women sleep with the few STD-ridden guys, while the STD-free guys are more likely abstinent

Oh really? Care to cite this source? I suspect I'll be waiting for a while because the fact of the matter is that women have a higher rate of STIs than men because of the anatomy of the vagina compared with the penis. The vagina has a larger surface area, an environment that can foster bacteria growth, and are exposed to more bodily fluids than the penis ever is (semen is ejaculated into a woman's body). Source

studies that show how women have sex sooner and more frequently than their 'average' male counterpart, and have more average partners per year

Actually, the opposite is true. In America:

The average age a female loses her virginity is 17.4 years old. For males it is 16.9 years old. Source
The average number of partners of an adult American male is seven. For a female, it is four. 29% of men report having more than 15 partners. Only 9% of women do. Source

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

Couple things.

First - read your own sources. I even linked to that Kinsley article in this thread to support myself. There is a lot more activity among young women than young men. But a few studs offset it.

Second - try some studies like this instead of NBC for science.

Third:

The average number of partners of an adult American male is seven. For a female, it is four. 29% of men report having more than 15 partners. Only 9% of women do.

If you used some common sense, you would see something is fishy with that. Where are all the women that men are sleeping with? How can the average male have twice as much sex as the average female? Again, if you had read your own source, there is a whole link devoted to this very topic and their attempt at explanation.

An additional confounding factor is that women lie when questioned about their sexual history if they think they can get away with it. This effect is not seen in men. So 'seven' could be probably the lifetime average for both sexes.

[–]polyhooly3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

In response to this:

all the women sleep with the few STD-ridden guys, while the STD-free guys are more likely abstinent

you link me to this:

Second - try some studies like this instead of NBC for science.

First of all, the article is from the Associated Press, and is reporting on the findings of studies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondly, that study you linked to does not say that "all the women are sleeping with a few disease ridden guys." The study says that men have a wider variance than women when it comes to the number of sexual partners, and that changes in the variance is correlated with changes in the STI rates of women. There is some truth to the notion that more women are having sex with a fewer number of men, but the assertion that this number of men is 20%, having sex with 80% of women is nothing short of being pulled out of your ass, and that study you linked to demonstrated that.

As my source demonstrated, the main reason women have higher STI rates than men is largely due to the fact that women catch them easier because of physiology.

An additional confounding factor is that women lie when questioned about their sexual history if they think they can get away with it. This effect is not seen in men. So 'seven' could be probably the lifetime average for both sexes.

You believe I didn't read my own sources, but dude, come on. That study did not say that women lie when questioned about their sexual history, and men don't. It found that women are more likely than men to lie. The men did lie: they padded how many partners they had, just to a lesser extent than the women downplayed how many partners they had. The study, however, found that the number of sexual partners of the men and women tested was pretty closed to even, again, questioning the credibility of your claim that women have, on average, more partners than men.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

When it comes to the 10-20% thing I'm still rather unconvinced. I have a friend that's into PUA stuff, and I have Christian virgin friends. I have a wide pool of people to draw from, and I still don't think that so few are getting so much of the sex. That's just my personal experience. When it comes to STD's I read somewhere that women are just biologically more prone to getting them, so it's not necessarily that they're sleeping around more.

studies that show how women have sex sooner and more frequently than their 'average' male counterpart, and have more average partners per year

If there is a study that shows that the numbers are skewed so heavily as claimed, then I'd be more inclined to believe it. As it stands, however, I don't currently.

As for this:

Well, shit, if only feminists could come to this conclusion.

Less than 50% women in college, medical school, law school, and among elected officials? Must be sexism! Telling women they don't have the option to stay at home and leave the workforce? Must be sexism!

You're preaching to the choir on this one. The silliness of that bothers me too.

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

http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resources/FAQ.html

See the 'frequency of sex' table.

Men have less sex than women when they're younger, then catch up when they're older.

Also interesting to note is the 'partnered' column. Men are much more likely to be abstinent even while having a relationship that year. My hypothesis is that the 'alpha' guys that have sex are always in and out of relationships. And again, anecdotally this holds true. I don't know any aggressive horny guys that have trouble getting a short term relationship at least.

Take 6 women who report 'had sex once this year while partnered'. These girls all took turns dating one guy who reports 'had sex every month/week'. But then the 6 other beta guys that dated one of these girls for 2 months with no sex and no other contact may not have sex that year.

And of course, these differences are big enough to be seen before taking into account the fact that girls lie on sexual surveys to hide their true number of partners.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (58 children) | Copy Link

[–]SudoTheAdmin-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (57 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]SudoTheAdmin-5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

But it can't be substituted. The homeopathy analogy relies on the same implication of the original comment - that subjective personal experience can allow us to determine accurately whether a method or approach works or not.

The comment of mine that you've dredged up from my comment history (in an alarmingly quick response) relies on the idea that we have to use objective measures and science to determine whether something that supposedly has empirical benefits works or not.

Basically, you've just supported my point by highlighting a position of my own where I reject Pizzaonearth's general approach (i.e. demonstrated the fact that I'm consistent in my position).

So thanks, I guess? But I think from now we can just assume that my position is correct and consistent until a valid argument can be presented against me. Heck, I'll settle for a coherent argument, or just any kind of argument rather than words vomited onto the screen.

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

[–]angatar_7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-5 points-5 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Enough personal experiences combined together does allow us to determine accurately whether a method or approach works. It's called collecting data and analyzing it.

No. Experiences are not data, they are anecdotes. No analysing takes place, people just talk about their experiences in uncontrolled settings in ways that skew their actual perceptions and retelling of events.

You consistently say, "WE NEED SCIENCE!" and completely ignore even the most basic things that humans do that produce meaningful objective and repeatable results without first formulating a double blind blah blah blah scientific study to be published in Nature.

I'm not ignoring it. Anecdotes can be useful in pointing us in direction where a causal relationship might exist. Their usefulness starts and stops there.

Thousands upon thousands of men interacting with dozens upon dozens of women can confidently compare notes and figure out what works and what doesn't, probabilistically. It's really not that hard of a concept.

It's not a hard concept, it's just that it's wrong. This is why we have science - precisely because we know that your approach inevitably leads to false conclusions.

You can have every single man report the exact same experience in every single situation they ever find themselves in and you still won't have any data. You'll have anecdotes that need testing.

And, importantly, you aren't helping your actual position. There are thousands and thousands of reports of homeopathy curing things like cancer. Do you actually believe that homeopathy works based on that?

This is the problem with the red pill approach. It talks a big game about valuing science, logic, and reason, and yet when their beliefs are challenged on the basis of science, logic, and reason, they start rejecting those things. Suddenly we don't need science to determine whether something works or not, we can use anecdotes.

[–]SudoTheAdmin-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Then please explain how scientists were able to determine the health benefits of fish oil.

They used a number of scientific methods, like longitudinal studies, comparing experimental groups to controls, established a mechanism of action, demonstrated similar effects in closely related species, etc., and all using objective measures and blinding to eliminate confounds and cognitive biases.

Hey, I'll tell you what they didn't do: they didn't go to a forum or community where people who love fish oil got together and talked about how they feel so much healthier after changing their diet and then concluded that fish oil must have health benefits. Because that would be fucking stupid.

If you are really trying to compare the anecdotes of red pillers to scientific research, then you are too far gone...

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–]angatar_2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]angatar_2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

Your entire ideology is based on everyone having innate biases that color everything they do or think.

My ideology was developed as a result of my experiences. It goes the other way... If I have experience to the contrary, I will change my view again to a different ideology.

No one has ever been helped by spirituality?

And people HAVE been helped by game.

Here's the timeline:

I grow up a feminist / egalitarian
My female classmates ignore me except for homework help. No positive responses when asking for dates.
I read PUA forums
I try game out and begin to have success in dating
I develop a new view of a more 'red pill' world
Profit!

You BPers all have this view that we are a cult blinded by our zeal. But you forget - we were not born this way. We became this way after observing our surroundings.

[–]angatar_2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

My ideology was developed as a result of my experiences. It goes the other way... If I have experience to the contrary, I will change my view again to a different ideology.

When people come across evidence contrary to their worldview, they tend to ignore it. That's bias. You're not free from bias.

And people HAVE been helped by game.

I'll admit I accidentally a word. No one has ever claimed to be helped by spirituality?

I grow up a feminist / egalitarian

Did this change?

My female classmates ignore me except for homework help. No positive responses when asking for dates.

There's a number of factors that could cause this, not just the lack of Red Pill.

I read PUA forums I try game out and begin to have success in dating

Again, it could be any number of things.

I develop a new view of a more 'red pill' world

So you develop bias in favor of the Red Pill based on circumstantial evidence.

You BPers all have this view that we are a cult blinded by our zeal.

Wait, wait, wait... All Blue Pillers think exactly alike?

But you forget - we were not born this way. We became this way after observing our surroundings.

Wow, The Red Pill taking nurture over nature. Interesting.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

The red pill THEORY is like any other theory. It is not a law of nature but it best describes the current set of observations.

I openly admit that if another, more 'PC' theory comes along that can rival TRP, I would readily change my ideology.

When people come across evidence contrary to their worldview, they tend to ignore it. That's bias. You're not free from bias.

Again, I accepted a change in worldview to join TRP. I am willing to do so again to leave it. I have no ties here other than utility. I changed from being a feminist to seeing the damage feminism causes, and seeing how women respond to such a world where they are given equal rights without equal responsibilities.

Again, it could be any number of things.

There it is. At the end of the day, TRP is the best I have. If you have something better, I'm all ears.

[–]redpillschoolRed Pill-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]angatar_7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link