This is the question I have been asking myself a lot lately.
And it looks like I am not the only one!
At least two Manosphere bloggers that I have read have made me think more along those lines recently...
The first is TPM...
You know you've taken The Red Pill when...
I guess his list applies mostly to men, although I certainly nodded when I saw one or two of those.
A few ladies added their own.
I nodded in agreement with those as well.
I could add a few of my own:
You know you've taken the Red Pill when...
1. You at least consider wearing 4-inch heels to the gym every time without fail, until you come to your senses and put on your trainers :-)
2. You start looking at people's hands not for evidence of piano-playing abilities but to check if they are 'high T' or not :-)
3. Anything that comes out of Hollywood instantly annoys you.
4. You get invited to a wedding and your first thought is: Have they both visited Athol's site yet?
5. Your brother says 'please' to you for the first time in his entire life and you wonder if he is turning into a massive beta on you :-)
6. You start rating everyone on the train according to SMV ranking, including yourself.
7. You feel an uncontrollable urge to cook for everyone in your vicinity.
8. You see a group of young people and you want to force-feed them The Red Pill, despite already being a pariah as a result of such tendencies.
9. You hear about a divorce and your first move is to ask if she wasn't 'happy' parrot-fashion, whatever the context you are given, Vicky Pollard style:
"Hannah and Jim are getting divorced."
"Is she unhappy?"
"It was Jim who asked for the divorce."
"Yeah but, no but, is she unhappy?"
"Jim is having an affair."
"Yeah but, no but, is she unhappy?"
"Jim moved out 5 months ago."
"Yeah but, no but, is she unhappy?"
"Jim says she got too fat after the twins were born."
"Yeah but, no but, is she unhappy?"
10. You go to church and you know exactly why there are no young men there.
It is funny how once you've taken this Pill, it pervades every area of your life.
It should come with a health warning, like all other pills :-)
Danny once said to me: 'There's no going back once you take this Pill'.
So true.
That means that unfortunately, I am stuck in this milieu for the rest of my life.
But I prefer this to Blue Pill ignorance.
*grin*
I certainly now look at women with 'masculine eyes'.
And I look at men with 'hypergamous intent'.
I now know exactly why a woman might be struggling to find or keep a mate. I am still no expert, but give me 5 minutes with her and I might have a plausible answer.
I can spot alphas and betas more readily than before. Or rather, I can spot alpha and beta 'moments' in a man.
And when I see couples, I am 'reading' their interaction like an open book.
This is all exhausting, but fun :-)
With my resolve not to watch so much TV, I have to find other ways to entertain myself somehow :-)
Maybe this is an extension of my 'synaesthesia', but I also now see everything in terms of male and female, even inanimate objects. Of course, it could also be a function of European languages having a 'gender' for everything.
To me nowadays...
A piano is feminine.
A church organ is masculine.
A sunny, blue sky day is feminine.
Stormy weather with thunder and lightning is masculine.
A lake is feminine.
A mountain is masculine.
A kiss on the cheek is feminine.
A bear hug with the potential to temporarily decrease your lung capacity is masculine.
*
I always resolved to keep away from PUAs and their message. I felt it was a bit too 'male locker room' for me. Even though I could see why their use of evopsych theories might help them in their quest...
Even though I understood why it is vital to know certain things about women. Things I did not know about my gender, and therefore about myself. But which I am glad I know now.
They do say though that once you start down that slippery slope, it's all the way down non-stop, or something to that effect.
I knew when I made a reference to Roosh on the post about foreign women that I had gone down a slippery slope...
And now well on the way of my descent I link to another PUA.
(God help me :-).
My hamster says it's OK, though, because this PUA is British.
And he is no longer a PUA anyway. He is a 'reformed PUA' or something. (Does this exist?).
I found this post very interesting. (Do excuse the colourful language beginning with the title!)
Before encountering The Manosphere, I would have concluded that this young woman was silent the whole time because she 'loved' this man. Simple as that. Or so my hamster would have had me believe.
My hamster, though, would have led me down the wrong rabbit-hole... again.
Apparently it is not so simple, as Krauser explains (like I am a 6 year old).
Fascinating stuff!
So my question is...
What do we do with all this knowledge we have acquired?
Does a man 'prepare' himself for the day when his wife goes 'EPL' on him, because, well, AWALT?
Does a woman accept cheating from her husband because well, men are subject to The Coolidge effect?
Should all fat women just hit the gym until they are a decent size again and not be seen nor heard from in the interim?
Should betas expect to keep getting the crumbs from their alpha brothers whilst they 'alpha up'?
How do we go from 'knowledgeable' to 'profiting from said knowledge'?
This is my first 'how' question.
I think I am done with the 'whys' now :-)
The following person was lucky enough to have taken the Red Pill in infancy...
But like me, he doesn't know what to do with his education of the third kind...
Can we help him out?
Yup!
Still waiting for answers...
This is tough...
Having reached the grand old age of 3, still nothing...
They said an education would provide some answers...
OK, so that was an outright lie...
Right now, the priority is to fnd some answers before check-out time...
:-)
117 comments:
Heerlijk.
Dank u Marellus.
Hoe haat het met u?
Ik zit met een bottel wijn en schrijf een gedigje oor je.
Hahaha,
Je bent gek, Marellus!
:-)
Drink niet te veel.
;-)
"What do we do with the evopsych stuff we have learnt after swallowing the Red Pill?"
The Answer is as simple as this:
Use the knowledge and tools to build the life you want.
Have fun with the execution though. It can be a bitch ;)
What’s Next?
What do we do with all this knowledge we have acquired?
We take the education we have acquired, and continue to acquire, and we carry it forward.
I take the nuggets of gold and apply it to my life as I need it, where I need it. I have come to realize that I am one who is often looked up to in groups of women and setting the tone, I attempt to impart what I learned to those around me. The life I live sets an example while achieving a respect that most often confounds me. For these reasons I feel that it is expected that what I have been given in wisdom over the years is to be passed on copiously.
Some days I selfishly weep. I read the words written by men who hurt and have been hurt and I cannot help but shed tears. I feel deeply; always have. At times I can feel the pain of others and I want to do something, but know that I cannot. I can only move forward knowing that they have their place of healing and finding their own knowledge, and I can pray. At times I feel selfish, putting myself in the place of women who have done the hurting and pushing away; and weep for them, the void that must be deep within them. They will not realize until too late what they have done, if they ever realize at all. I don’t know why I feel for them. Perhaps it is for their ignorance.
Most times I am thankful that I did learn, that I recognize and understand I married a very good man. That with eyes wide open I give to him all that he has always deserved. That I can look at him and feel overwhelming respect for who he is. That when I do read the words of others and I do feel them so deeply, that I go to him and make sure that he will never feel pain similar to what is in the words of some. That he will know beyond doubt how deeply I care for him.
I want to leave something for others. I want to take what I have learned and continue to learn, and live it, show it, teach it.
This cracks me up. I never say please to women or men. But one woman I know says pleeeeeze to me and I always give in. Sometimes she says pretty please and I just start laughing and give in.
As for evo-psych, we're on this earth to overcome nature. Not that I believe in it anyways. I can come up with evo-psych explanations by the dozen.
The reason we study this stuff is to understand our human nature. Forewarning is the first step in forearming...so hopefully the EPL moment doesn't happen. That said, I see when people behave with their biological programming, fully unaware of it...annoys me sometimes.
We humans have a particular ability to rise beyond our natural programming. We have our reason. We're special, and we're not alone. It's our duty to use our faculties to take care of ourselves and plan our future so our children live better lives than we do.
As with any movement...we try to propagate it. Find little teachable moments. Slip it in, so that most people become aware, even dimly aware is better than nothing.
I love the list.
What to do with it? Use it in our lives to good purpose. Keep it in mind with relationships. The primal traits are our potency and seat of power, so they can translate into other areas in our lives. Develop our characters and virtues with just as much awareness and dedication, and I think that you'd have western civilization back on track.
Though that's a controversial issue in the sphere. Some seem to be going in that direction, other's scoff and call it beta. Still, when I think of the word patriarch, I don't picture a poolside nihillist.
PVW here. Good questions, ST, what have we gotten out of these conversations on the "red pill," "evolutionary psychology," etc.?
Well, it has certainly made me more pensive and self-reflective, aware. Has it changed anything in how I relate, ie., to the husband? I can't say it has, as I haven't felt that there is anything lacking that needed changing.
Now that I am back in school today, I find myself talking with a number of former students, primarily the young men I have seen in passing and who called out to me.
Others might work with in the near future, ie., they are interested in being my research/teaching assistants.
These young men were among the best students in the classes I taught last year, and I knew from my interactions with them in the course of the academic year, that they enjoyed taking my classes.
Note, although I teach women's history, I teach other classes as well that draw a larger spectrum of students.
In observing these young men, I find myself wondering, who is alpha? Who is beta?
What is my students' orientation like, where they are meeting each other for the first time? For the young women, is it the "hooking up scene?"
I find myself interested in modeling for my students, and I have done this before, but I'm more aware of it now, to model an example of female competence, leadership in the classroom that is feminine, attractive and supportive.
Perhaps that is why I can get all these bright and handsome (stop drooling, PVW, you're an old married woman!) young men to work with me?
Tee hee.....
Thanks for all the helpful answers, everyone!
You know when you feel you've learnt something, but not sure how to apply it necessarily? This is now for me:-)
Leap,
Your answer is indeed very simple! If it is really that simple, then that's good, alors!
Jacquie,
Wow, you are a very good example of what all women should be like!
May you continue to be a shining beacon for all those around you. I am certainly hoping to follow in your footsteps.
What you say about weeping reminds me of what Bellita once wrote about 'seeing a crown of thorns and instantly wanting to wear it'.
I think I am a bit like that sometimes (I guess it depends on the situation lol).
I do find that I can't help but feel very close to tears when I see people make horrendous decisions that I now know will come back to haunt them later...an example is the uncontrolled hook-up scene among young people. I know the men will get away with it. Sadly not the women...and I want to tell them that, knowing what I know. But somehow I am not yet succeeding. There is clearly something wrong with my 'delivery method' :-)
Ceer, I am only just about delivering titbits so far...I am not able to go the full hog yet.
:-)
Bob,
:-)
I am sure I'll never get another 'please'. It's a 'once-in-a-lifetime experience!
JV,
I had a chat with a male colleague recently who told me that the Catholic Church is by definition 'misogynistic'. I countered by disagreeing and declaring it 'patriarchal'. He didn't see the difference.
A year ago, I might have agreed with him. But now I see very much a stark difference between the two.
Couldn't get him on board though. Massive fail on my part...
But I guess he needs to come to that realisation all by himself... I know he won't listen to what I have to say on this matter lol.
PVW,
Hey, there's nothing in the rule-book that says you can't drool, is there?
Is there?
;.)
Two things:
1) What Jacqui said.
2) Great list, ST!
What are we going to to do?
What we will do is continue to upgrade ourselves and steer those that want NOT need the knowledge in the right direction.
This question: Does a woman accept cheating from her husband because well, men are subject to The Coolidge effect?
Is a post within itself.
The Man: He has NOT gone through his “player stage” that 100% of us Men must go through ( I mentioned that in the “Why Men Treat Good Girls Like Shit” post.
The Woman: Will most likely think “Men ain’t shit, all Men are the same and probably accept/forgive her husband. Whereas ,
Her CHOICES ain’t shit, she SHOULD BE UPGRADED by other Ladies in the game and Men with constructive criticism so that she makes better choices in terms of a “Husband”.
My 2 Cents. .
Can't tell you what to do with your knowledge, only what I do with mine.
At the risk of being repetitive: Be what you want to be, do what you want to do, hurt nothing in the process, and stay true to yourself.
The Navy Corpsman
Navy
I only have issues with your part of "Hurt nothing in the process" because I don't think that you can do anything at all, much less anything of worth, without hurting SOMEONE.
I think, rather, that it should be "don't maliciously hurt someone" I won't even go as far to say intentionally. Pain is good for people as a learning tool, and there are instances where to stay true to yourself, keep your frame, and keep your masculinity you have to hurt something or someone. I see nothing wrong with this, even if I don't enjoy the actual infliction of pain, I do enjoy staying true to myself.
@ Space Traveler
Yep. Simple concept, hard execution. I personally just got fired from a job (not a big deal because I'm an independent contractor and have others lined up) because I stayed true to myself, set up boundaries, and refused to back down from them or be taken advantage of. It was liberating, but one of the hardest things I've done in a long, long time.
As usual, you can read it in detail on my blog
As a practical matter it makes you more cynical about the opposite sex. But you sure get better at screening for the good ones.
ST:
PVW,
Hey, there's nothing in the rule-book that says you can't drool, is there?
Is there?
Me:
Absolutely, drooling is fine as long as I respect boundaries (and I do) and remain professional in my dealings!
I find interesting your observations about being eager to wear the "crown of thorns" upon feeling another's pain. It is just something I can't relate to, especially as I don't see myself as a "feeler" type.
Things that affect me personally and those near to me, bring me to tears, without question. I can empathize and sympathize as well, but I'm less likely to be drawn to tears, though.
And the Red Pill will make you an 'alpha' ... or so it's said ... ha.
And 'alpha' is akin to 'nirvana' in other religions ... oh ? ... don't believe me ... we are seeing the birth of a religion, ST.
And the most resilient religions have one thing in common :
Give people something impossible to strive for, and they'll come running.
All that is needed now is its martyrs and a sacred text.
And that is coming.
Game was this religion's father, but the MRA movement will be its mother ... and nobody makes fun with mother ... don't you think ?
But mocking its father ... now that is another story ... and an old one ...
Bell,
Thank you Bell.
Do you have your own list? Please share!
I know yours would include...
You know you've taken the Red Pill when...you see the good in every man you meet.
Any more for us?
Mack,
I checked out the post you suggested. Enlightening, as usual. You seem to be suggesting that a woman should really wait to check that a man is done with his 'player past' if he has one. I agree. Some men also do this by themselves by withdrawing themselves from a woman if they feel they are not ready to settle down yet. At the risk of losing the woman of course. But I see why this might be good for any relationship. It allows for 'time out' on both sides.
NC and Leap,
Yes, sometimes staying true to oneself definitely involves hurting someone. Eg. in the example above that I give to Mack. Keeping this to a minimum is no mean feat.
PVW,
The feeling thing can be a burden sometimes. I only started being this way after I hit 30. And now I can't seem to shift it. I think it will stay with me for life now. I am not sure it is necessary for life though. Getting soft in me old age lol.
Um, Marellus is at it again...
Hahahahaha!
Didn't get ANY of that Marellus.
Explain it like I am a 6 year old...
Senior Beta,
Now your comment makes me see a major difference in what The Red Pill does to the genders.
For a woman, the Red Pill does the opposite of what you suggest!
As Bell also noted, and I concur, the Red Pill makes us, if anything, MORE respectful of men, more introspective and more able to see men as central beings to life in general. Blue Pill world has marginalised men, for sure. Those of us women who seek The Red Pill feel a knot in our stomachs which lets us know something about that is not quite right. And we won't laugh when a bunch of women are joking about a man whose private parts have been chopped off by his angry wife. Because it doesn't feel right.
Now I realise that to be receptive to this Red Pill message, you have to be already a certain way. Perhaps some of us are. But I am also sure that many women can be persuaded to change the false script they have been fed even if they have absorbed it into their core. In any case, the question, 'So how's that working out for you?' should be an important one that must not be ignored. If a woman is truly happy in her contempt of men, fine, she should stay that way. But I bet these are the same women asking, 'Where are all the good men?'
And somehow they are failing to make the connection between their contempt of men and the lack of 'good men'.
I once mentioned somewhere on this blog, I think, about an acquaintance who, each time I was near her, I felt the need to flee, after I started looking at her with 'masculine eyes'. She is much older than me and still asking the question, 'Where are all the good men?' And yet she never listens to me when I reply (not so bluntly of course!): 'Running fast in the opposite direction from you'.
It's amazing how she fails to see what she is doing wrong every time. It is afterall crystal clear to me. And I ain't very bright. She prefers to keep making the same mistake over and over again to listening to what I have to say.
*sigh*
Perhaps that should tell me something about myself. I just can't get through to certain people effectively enough, no matter how hard I try...
Maybe I should just ease up and let them find their own way. But their own way hasn't worked out for so long. And a woman's life is time-sensitive...
I know that only too well myself...
Hence my race aginst time...
@ST
Um, Marellus is at it again...
Hahahahaha!
Didn't get ANY of that Marellus.
Explain it like I am a 6 year old...
... for that I'll have to pull you over my lap ...
Leap of a Beta said...
"Navy
I only have issues with your part of "Hurt nothing in the process" because I don't think that you can do anything at all, much less anything of worth, without hurting SOMEONE."
Maybe.... or maybe there are other ways that remove the hurt. The other thing you have to keep in mind is that telling me I am ugly MIGHT hurt, but lying to me that I am handsome WILL hurt... because of the lie.
And there is the part where we separate the men from the women. Women will almost overwhelmingly lie to save someone's feelings, men would rather hear the truth.
Yes, I suppose one could make a case that by my very existence, I am hurting someone, somewhere. Seven billion people on this planet, I guess my very breath is stealing oxygen from some organism somewhere.
Sorry, tough shit. Karma isn't relative. A famous search engine loves to tell people that their number one mantra is "Do no evil". Since their initial public offering on the NYSE, one could easily make the case that they changed it to "Do no evil to the stockholders".
I'm not going to add the qualifying "maliciously" but you're more than welcome to adopt whatever you want to your life. I've accidentally hurt plenty of people in my lifetime, and despite my best efforts, I'm more than aware that I failed as a father many times, as well as a husband.
I do not live in an ideal world, but that does not mean I cannot try to live ideally.
The Navy Corpsman
If he really had taken the red pill then he knows. Once you taken the red pill, blue pill mentality just makes no sense.
But then again....I didn't read the whole post. You know how wordy I find your posts. Lol.
@SpaceTraveler,
Yes I can attest that 99.9% of us Men must get the itch out of us aka "The Player Stage" out of all of us. and that post gave an abundance of examples, important people even in the spotlight that erupted into chaos after NOT taking heed to their player stage.
I like this post and keep doing what you do!!
Question to ST:
Why are you troubling yourself over blue pill women? Like my Navy HM pals are saying, guys who (finally) swallow the red pill will not waste much time with their blue pill bretheren. Too much else to do.
ST
For a woman, the Red Pill does the opposite of what you suggest!
As Bell also noted, and I concur, the Red Pill makes us, if anything, MORE respectful of men...
Hmm, no. Most women posting in these blogs/forums are anti-feminist and often social ultra-conservative and don't represent the average woman any more than the most aggressive feminists do. Women like me don't comment in blogs like this one because we'll get flames and insults, which means for me that there's no one to talk to - it's an echo chamber. Which is fine - you want your own corner where you can confirm each other's worldview without disturbance from anyone different or who thinks differently - I have no problem with that - there are some issues where I prefer an echo chamber myself. But that doesn't give you enough of a database to be able to say how women in general respond to the supposed "red pill". In my case, for instance, it sure doesn't make me more respectful of men, but rather the extreme opposite.
Which is rather sad because I actually used to like men. Since my teens I had more male friends than female friends and many of them turned me into their confidant because they found it easier to share some of their emotions and vulnerabilities with me than with their male friends, and because I could listen to them for hours whereas their male friends got impatient, which is particularly crucial in times of crisis. Of course, they got hurt by some women, but women get hurt by men too. I never saw it as a Men vs. Women thing. Some things just happen, and some people are better than others, whether male or female.
I recognized their sexuality was different from mine - most of them had a far stronger sex drive and they saw most women (or men if they're gay) sexually (but not only sexually) while I only see a man sexually if I have feelings for him (but I'm on the far end of the spectrum in this sense). Other than that I thought we were pretty much alike. I mean we had a lot in common, we usually wanted similar things out of life, we could talk about almost any subject from our personal lives to politics to philosophical questions.
I choose the same type of men for both friendships and relationships - very smart and very sensitive introverts with a rich inner world that draws me in. What you call "alpha males" I used to call "baboons". They just seemed unevolved, crude, crass, emotionally shallow, immature, emptyheaded, and consequently boring. But I suppose that's how many introverts view extroverts of whatever gender. When I first reached the so-called "red pill" blogs a short time ago I saw that what they call "alpha male" closely corresponds with I call "baboon", whereas what they call "beta male" is far closer to the type of man I'm attracted to. But the real shock came with reading what men who identify themselves as "betas" write - turns out they want the same things the "alphas" want, but just fail or failed in the past to get them. So those men are not really more "evolved", gentler, more sensitive and more spiritual - they're "baboons" just like the other type, except they're failed "baboons". And if that's true it means there are simply no attractive men in existence as far as I'm concerned. I really can't be attracted to this kind of men, which means I'll have to choose celibacy. And since I'm Jewish I can't even be a nun...
It also means I've been lied to by most men. I assume men feel more comfortable to say what they really feel and think under the cover of Internt anonymity than they'd feel telling it to my face. But I'm not sure the manosphere really represents all men. I really hope it doesn't.
To be continued...
Re: Someone you'll hate
What an odd choice of a name. It's almost as if she wants to pick a fight . . .
Having noted the above, I'll also add that there seems to be a great deal of sadness involved in the process of understanding this "red pill" knowledge. I remember one married woman saying she felt sad to know that her husband would be attracted to their infant son's future girlfriends, even if she truly trusts him never to act on it or otherwise cheat on her. Grasshopper in particular may remember my own (ill-concealed?) emotional reaction to the "boner test." And I see the same sadness in the previous poster's comment, when she says that all men are "baboons."
It's similar to the sadness many men reveal when they first discover the Manosphere, immerse themselves a little too long in its darker side, and emerge believing that all women are "sluts" who trade sex for status (but shouldn't that be a "whore"?) and that no woman can ever be fully capable of love. And to paraphrase the previous poster, for men who believe this, "there are simply no attractive women in existence, as far as they're concerned." Are they right or wrong?
Insofar as individuals determine what is or what is not attractive to themselves, our personal opinions are perfectly valid. But I don't think such a damning view of women (if you are a man) or of men (if you are woman) is very mature--or as the previous poster would say, "sensitive" and "spiritual."
Bellita,
It seems to be the course for some in first reading about the red pill. Your idea of the world is shattered and the pendulum swings wide. You feel you've been lied to. I had much the same thing happen at first. Some days were very difficult reading the things I did. As the pendulum swung back toward middle I felt a bit more balance. I really cannot fault anyone for feeling as SYHS feels. There are many on the blogs who need to vent. The more I read, the more I understood.
I concur that there is a great deal of sadness understanding the red pill, anger goes with it.
I think the sadness and anger level depends on whether you were brought up with the concepts, or came to them later in life. If your world view is suddenly turned on its ear it's going to cause a lot of emotional upset.
That said, even though I was exposed to a lot of the concepts long before entering the sphere, there were a lot of things that I learned from the blogs and commenters.
In the end, knowledge is power. What you do with that knowledge is up to you.
SYH wrote
But the real shock came with reading what men who identify themselves as "betas" write - turns out they want the same things the "alphas" want, but just fail or failed in the past to get them. So those men are not really more "evolved", gentler, more sensitive and more spiritual - they're "baboons" just like the other type, except they're failed "baboons". And if that's true it means there are simply no attractive men in existence as far as I'm concerned. I really can't be attracted to this kind of men, which means I'll have to choose celibacy. And since I'm Jewish I can't even be a nun...
This reminds me of a conversation I had with my dad when I was young. For context, he was a cad.
Me: No they aren't like that.
Dad: They're all like that.
Me: No, YOU'RE like that. The guys I know are nice. They don't think like that.
Dad: Even the nice one's.
Me: No they don't. I would know.
I think that men and women can get a bit horrified when they pull back the veil on the primal traits. Even the female locker room conversations on this blog will have the men feeling uncomfortable. There's a reason why our grandparents were taught to maintain decorum and mystery, lol.
A man being evolved isn't wiped out because the veil get's lifted. It isn't either/or. It's both. Same with women. Possessing primal traits doesn't mean that she isn't a lady.
@ SYH
"Women like me don't comment in blogs like this one because we'll get flames and insults, which means for me that there's no one to talk to - it's an echo chamber. Which is fine - you want your own corner where you can confirm each other's worldview without disturbance from anyone different or who thinks differently - I have no problem with that - there are some issues where I prefer an echo chamber myself."
You have to realize that most of the men here, while they're writing in an echo chamber, are not living in one. We go out every day and deal with feminism. It eats away at our strength, our moral, and our goals. We come here to learn how to deal with it in a safe, calm manner so that we don't explode by going out and shooting up a school, a theatre, or a feminist class. Instead, we reach for a balance. Based on the lack of such violent measures, most of us are successful.
"So those men are not really more "evolved", gentler, more sensitive and more spiritual - they're "baboons" just like the other type, except they're failed "baboons"."
If you think this, then you haven't grasped the red pill really is. You've seen a small sliver of the primal being a man is, but then didn't learn anything about what we as men use that primal being as a foundation to build. Those individuals you knew very well could be (and statistically probably are) simply failed baboons without knowing it. But here we try and use our inner animals to achieve the things we want.
You should really read some of the other 'Sphere blogs that deal with things other than game based on your thinking. Yohami, The Rawness, and a few others are great at searching for a balanced life as an alpha, having our masculinity, having a healthy emotional and mental landscape, and achieving our goals. As far as I know, those two are the best for advice and thoughts on how to do that. My own blog has details on HOW I'm taking what they write about and implementing it into my own life.
It has led to hilarious stories, fun times, getting used by women but learning from it. Standing up for myself and getting fired for it. To being happier for being fired and able to pursue more rewarding work.
"I really can't be attracted to this kind of men, which means I'll have to choose celibacy."
Then you should look to your religion. As a man raised a Christian, I don't have the firmest groundings on Jewish beliefs as they differ from Christianity. But I'm sure that your religion calls you to find a husband you can be faithful to and love as he was made in God's image. That includes the primal parts of him as well; those have been there since the beginning of time and women have always been able to find men to love and provide for them.
But hey, if you want to cull yourself out of the gene pool while also ignoring your religion's call to find a husband and continue your traditions within a family unit... Well, welcome to the empowered land of Feminism where that is just as OK as it always has been, but now is sans shame.
As a correlation to the turn this discussion has turned, I submit Vox's recent post:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2012/09/women-arent-attracted-to-godly-men.html
SYH,
Don't blame men for adapting to what women have rewarded them for through out history. Recently mainstream media has muddied the waters with mixed messages, but men are both catching on and getting back in touch with their instincts. A man can be an animal, a gentleman, and a religious man. Maybe not all at once for all situations, but we bring out aspects of ourselves as needed to provide support for the ones we view as worth our commitment.
I suspect these varying needs for varying situations are what have driven men to learn how to compartmentalize over the course of human history.
Leap has a great post called The Stones of Masculinity that puts things into perspective.
...I hope we didn't scare her away. I tried to keep my honesty and curiosity relatively friendly in tone.
I'm genuinely interested in learning both why she views men as baboons when her religion teaches that the way men are is how they're supposed to operate in how they're made by God. Or how they're supposed to 'rise above' this state in her eyes when it's the state we've been living in since man came to live on this planet.
I mean, I know my answers to those questions. Or rather, I know both the feminist rhetoric's answer and I know my personal answer is the path I'm on and I have faith that it will take me to those answers.
Danny,
My posts? Wordy?
Never!
:-)
I think the posts are getting shorter and shorter, no?
By at least 1 word each time?
Hahahahaha!
SYH,
Welcome to The Sanctuary!
Hey, please....chill.
I won't hate you. And even if we don't agree on some issues, so what? It's just a blog!
As Bellita noted, you seem a bit... defensive??
You are right - this, like many other blogs, is rather like an echo chamber. I agree with you there. But you know why I prefer it this way? It's supposed to be a haven from the chaos that exists in Blue Pill world. It is a 'retreat' into a kind of personal utopia where I can discuss serious issues with people whose ideas are more or less consistent with mine. No political correctness here. I am sick of that in the real life. So, full disclosure out of the way, I would like to address some of the nice points you present.
Might I say, you clearly disagree with me, but you state your points in a frank and agreeable way. Thank you for that.
Many women commenters who get bad press when they comment on Manosphere/Genderspere blogs, do so simply for having no decent way of expressing themselves. Hence they disqualify themselves even before they have gotten their meesage across. That's a shame. Because that way, there can be no discussion.
You may already have noticed that there are some women commenters here that the rest don't necessarily agree with on some issues. But we coexist. Trouble only starts to brew when personal insults/'shaming language'/ridiculous and implausible points start flying around. Men do this too, of course, but I have personally noticed that this is usually a female crime. I have been guilty of this too. Which effectively makes me a troll on my own blog!
But that aside,
"Most women posting in these blogs/forums are anti-feminist and often social ultra-conservative and don't represent the average woman any more than the most aggressive feminists do."
Correct on both counts. Although as I mention above, there are notable exceptions. But still, we coexist peacefully with the exceptions...
"Women like me don't comment in blogs like this one because we'll get flames and insults,"
I like to think that I am open to a different point of view, even though I know that I am rather rigid in my views, and extreme to boot. I accept that this is a failing on my part. But some here have managed to change my views on certain issues. I cannot of course vouch for the reaction of others, but hopefully if you present your argument in a coherent and acceptable manner, some, if not most will listen to you. But remember that the women will always be more tolerant of a 'woman-friendly' point of view than most of the men, because as Leap mentions, the men here who comment are sick of the misandry that is present in real life. For us women, this is not our reality, so we can afford to be more lenient of a point of view that appears to push (yet again!) the 'wimminz agenda'. However, some of us choose to be as annoyed as the men when such a situation arises. It depends on the situation. So be prudent on which topics you choose to participate in, yes. You are right, it could be brutal. But that is the nature of the game. We have a dissatisfied party here. They are not done being heard. Until they are, it's all gloves off, I'm afraid. I really cannot help that. Am I an accomplice? Yes. Because I happent to see their point of view, and I have decided it is valid. I could be wrong of course, but for now, I am happy with that decision.
Funnily enough, I agree with you on the baboon analogy! (although personally, perhaps I wouldn't use that word - as it may appear offensive to some). Yes there are some men with alpha traits who are not good men. Bellita calls them 'sizzle without the steak'. No-one is saying here that you should go for such men.
But there is no denying that some of the masculine traits they possess do seem to work with women. This is why I think Game is a great leveller. The guys with the beta traits want what the guys with the alpha traits have, but they don't necessarily want to change who they are intrinsically. Already possessing good Inner Game, a lot of these so-called beta guys could really do well with some 'outer Game'. In the same way, the great women who may be fat or masculine-looking could do with learning how to be more attractive to men in a visual sense. That way, they now have both the superficial and the deep all sorted out.
Can't argue with that reasoning, surely!
Everyone says what they really think under the cloak of anonymity, SYH! It's only natural. I find it interesting that you feel lied to by men. If by 'lied to', you mean, they don't tell you what's really on their minds, then I sympathise. I call such men 'quiet men'. I know plenty of those, lol.
But I don't feel 'lied to' by them as such. I see this feature as part of their nature. This is why I feel grateful for the anonymity of the internet in enabling some men to share their thoughts with us ladies. And I know they are speaking the truth as they see it, because afterall, why should they lie if it's all anonymous anyway?
The only people I feel are the real liars are the feminists. I wish they would go quiet, but alas, that's not going to happen anytime soon...
I am sure you don't need to be a nun to live a holy life. Are you sure that's what you want, a life without men in it? Are you sure?
If I may be so bold as to make an assertion based on your comment: You are not done swallowing The Red Pill...yet It is still stuck in your throat. It needs to get to the very end of the digestive tract for you to see things the way the rest of us do (sorry to be crude!).
It is a process, and I daresay a long one. Not to be patronising, but most people need at least a year of this stuff before it is fully assimilated.
The clue to my conclusion came from this:
"But that doesn't give you enough of a database to be able to say how women in general respond to the supposed "red pill". In my case, for instance, it sure doesn't make me more respectful of men, but rather the extreme opposite."
Any woman who claims not to respect men is not "Red Pill".
That's the hallmark of Blue Pill, I promise you.
Others may have already, and certainly, others might explain to you why what I say is correct. My comment is already too long...
You may have read Manosphere blogs a lot. But with that last statement, you are still showing evidence of being Blue Pill. That's OK. I am not knocking you for it. I am merely making an obervation.
In any case, welcome on board. It can be a rocky cruise sometimes, but apart from the occaional unpleasantness, it is fairly cordial here.
@ Leap and JV,
Interesting points you make about the primal nature...
Sometimes, very religious women need reminding that men come with a certain appendage...
This sometimes 'shocks' them, I swear ;-)
And as you say, JV, sometimes there are things about women that men seem surprised at.
Learning things about each other in this way that we do (on the internet) is a stress-free, fun way of doing it, and that helps us all to coexist in harmony, in real life.
Jaquie and Bell,
"I concur that there is a great deal of sadness understanding the red pill, anger goes with it."
"It's similar to the sadness many men reveal when they first discover the Manosphere, immerse themselves a little too long in its darker side, and emerge believing that all women are "sluts" who trade sex for status (but shouldn't that be a "whore"?) and that no woman can ever be fully capable of love. And to paraphrase the previous poster, for men who believe this, "there are simply no attractive women in existence, as far as they're concerned." Are they right or wrong?"
For sure, Jacquie and Bell. It's like the grieving process, isn't it? One grieves for the necessary shedding of the old ideas. That is always painful. Bell, I think SYH is perhaps in the 'dark side' stage? She needs to emerge from that to be truly Red Pill.
You also touch on a point I had struggled to make in reply to Senior Beta before. Which is, there is a difference in men's and women's reaction to The Red Pill because...for men, it is a realisation that they have been hard done by their whole life up to that point when they take the Red Pill. For women, it's a realisation that things have been smoothed out for us (but we didn't notice because we thought it was 'normal'). But it wasn't and isn't 'normal'. We would have had a harder and ruder awakening if the special privileges that we still have were suddenly and without warning removed from us. But as it is, the Red Pill informs us ever so politely of those privileges at a time we still have said privileges. I could list those...but do I really need to???
It is yet another 'double standard'.
Senior Beta,
"Why are you troubling yourself over blue pill women?"
Um, 'cos you guys want us to spread the word, no?
In any case, I am clearly no good at it. I am failing badly in real life. I need a new strategy.
Or perhaps I just need to stop!
No Bellita, I don't want to pick a fight, but I know exactly what type of reactions I get in this type of forums - hence the nickname I chose. Not because of what I think of the supposed "red pill" blogs, but because here I'd be considered a feminist and you hate feminists. In my social environment I'm just considered a normal person with normal opinions, but in forums like this I'd be called a bitch. But what you should take from what I wrote is that the women who do post here don't represent all women and probably not the average woman either. Women like me simply don't comment here because our opinions are unwelcome, so you're missing the input of a very large percentage of women. That prevents you or ST from accurately generalizing about women (like saying "red pill" makes women more respectful of men). You can only speak for yourselves and you're a minority. I think a more common reaction would be indeed becoming more cynical about men.
I've been around the so-called "red pill" blogs for only a short while, but even so I figured most female readers simply won't comment. In Hooking Up Smart they've mentioned that many women left and stopped commenting there even though that blog is specifically for women. I can see why that happens. The so-called "red pill" websites don't really represent reality, but just a segment of it and it turns into a closed bubble because any criticism or differing opinions are met with hostility, flames and name calling. So there is no room for any meaningful discussion. I read them to know what at least part of the men think, but I take it with a grain of salt.
The other, and better, reason I read and watch Game websites and vids is because they help me improve my own skills and mindset in many ways, except I don't use it for pickup, but for just about everything else in life. I ignore the very flawed evo-psych theory and implement many of the advice that are supposed to be only for men according to the theory. Being non-aggressively assertive, confident, having an abundance mindset, daring to dare (daring to approach in pickup context, but genrally in life just daring), not depending on approval/result/validation for your happiness, and generally expecting and having fun in everything you do can work wonders for both men and women. There are many other good advice there if I filter the icky stuff out. Very good for women too. If you watch the vids from their boot camps there are occasionally women there too, did you notice? Women who go there for the self-improvement advice prescribed for men. It works for women too, which I think should give everyone a pause.
...
Besides, most people posting in these blogs are American and I'm not, and there may be some cultural differences, at least in the level of male chauvinism or the prevalence of social conservatism. I'm Israeli. Israel is supposed to be a bit of a macho culture, at least according to some gays and some feminists, probably compared to Western Europe... I'm sure Israel is more of a macho culture than Scandinavia, but I rather doubt it's really that macho. On American blogs I've been called a militant feminist, a bitch and what not for saying things that'll be considered entirely mainstream on Israeli forums and won't cause one eyebrow to be raised. Of course, we have our share of jerks, women-haters, male supremacists and what not, but I've never felt like I was walking on egg shells and sharp razors when hanging around with a bunch of guys in forums, in spite of the anonymity. They're really softies in comparison and I think they're far less uptight about their masculinity, though no one suspects Israeli men of being feminine. I also never asked where did all the good guys go because there seems to be quite a few of them around. In fact, before accidentally finding the first so-called "red pill" blog I didn't think I have any problem with men in general (I had problems with a few specific men, but don't we all?). It's only after reading these blogs that I started suspecting the nice guys I like aren't really all that nice.
ST,
I don't intend to write here a lot because I really don't see the point. I understand why people need an echo chamber because, like I said, there are some issues where I prefer an echo chamber myself. It's like a support group.
I commented today because you said women respond differently to the "red pill" and it made us more respectful of men - that was a generalization I felt was grossly incorrect factually (though I didn't conduct a survey, so I might be wrong), which provoked me to respond and say I feel just the opposite, just so people won't get the impression it's really all women who feel like that.
I also responded to the question you posed about where do we take this knowledge, and my answer was that IF it's true I prefer to stay away from men. Though I was joking about the nun part. But in reality I don't believe these blogs represent all men. It just doesn't fit my experience.
As for offending, I was often enraged when reading this blog and the comments, though I've only read pehaps a dozen posts so far. I found a lot of it very offensive. I'll try to explain it from a different angle, so maybe you can understand how I feel. Replace woman with Jew. In the past Jews in many places were not allowed to enroll in general education institutions, they couldn't study in universities, they were denied access to many professions, they couldn't own land, didn't have the same civil rights as non-Jews and were barred from public life. Today Jews have full equal rights. Now imagine I'll drive by a forum today where there was a discussion about whether Jews should continue having access to high education, and if so should their access be limited to only certain professions that fit some predefined roles assigned to Jews. Do you think I'd be justified in being angry? If you can understand why I would be angry in this case try replacing Jews with women.
I didn't respond to that discussion about female education in a previous thread because I see no point in it. You're right that you are extreme and so are many of the commenters here. People who are different are not necessarily so because we haven't yet discovered our true nature. A lot of people do know quite a bit about their true nature, but just have a different nature. Evo psych is very reductive (and flawed too) and certainly doesn't cover the entire human variety and complexity.
@ SYH
Welcome to the Sanctuary. For a little background: our host Spacetraveller is and English speaking European, and commenters are mainly from Western Europe and North America.
Please allow me to share you my personal story. I was raised by an intact family with a beta father and feminist (Catholic) mother in the southeast US. Growing up, I was always taught that "when a woman says no, she means no" and that women should be respected, and men should always be polite. This made sense, it's part of the culture. So I treated women just like I treat men. I decided my strategy...look for marriageable women to date. Open up in the same polite manner in which I treat men, build a cordial relationship, and build off of that into a stable marriage of mutual love and respect.
Fast forward to today where I'm over 30 and single. This strategy is obviously a failure. I have to face reality and form a new plan quickly before I become an evolutionary dead end. Was I upset that I had wasted over a decade of reproductive life because of an incompetent upbringing? Yes. Was I hurt that women appeared to be more cold-calculating, socially climbing, ungracious, and dismissive rather than sugar, spice, and everything nice? Yes. How I feel about this situation isn't relevant. The simple fact is that women are choosing for different characteristics than what I display.
In this situation, I have basic companionship needs that aren't being met. It isn't my fault, because I was doing something in line with what I was taught. It isn't the fault of the people who honestly gave me advise and tried to steer me to what they thought was best. This is the situation where I start finding pua websites, and from there, the rest of the mannosphere.
From this point, I have two options: fight to change my lot in life, or MGTOW. Since despite rampant divorce, misandry, and lack of support, I still value marriage...so I choose option 1. I guess I'm stubborn.
This shift comes partly from the women themselves. They require gina tingles above all else, so I'm reacting to the rules change. Women get to pick the rules by which men play. Part of this is women are responsible for setting up the rules so that the men they ultimately will be happy with are more likely to be selected. Sexual freedom means society will not help you set the proper tone.
Before you dismiss my personal experience as a fluke, I'd like to share two more things. Many of my male friends are unmarried. Not because they choose to be. Because they cannot find a woman who's both marriageable and compatible. Also, I've seen women who actually have happy relationships with betas. The difference I see is in the mindset of the woman and her ability to detect a man's marriage value.
Will post again when I have the time.
@Jacqui and @JV
Re: sadness
One of the drafts I intended for the "One Year Later" series (I use that word lightly!) but never published compared new understanding of the primal traits of the opposite sex to finally learning that Santa Claus is your parents. That is, I think that the first romantic understanding is a myth that we should grow out of before we mature but ALSO a cultural myth with some value. Perhaps I'll ask ST to host another guest post so that I can explain properly.
Sigh! I can't quit the Gendersphere, can I? :P Hahahaha!
@SYH
I know exactly what type of reactions I get in this type of forums - hence the nickname I chose.
And did you get them?
I'm honestly wondering what you think of the reactions you just received here.
the women who do post here don't represent all women and probably not the average woman either.
I can't speak for ST, of course, but this has been obvious to me for a long time. This is a bit of a straw man.
It works for women too, which I think should give everyone a pause.
Why should it give us pause? You seem to think we are caricatures that we are not (and also that we'd think you are a caricature that you are not). For me, Gendersphere participation has always been about my own self-improvement, too. And if Game works for you, then that's wonderful!
I have also, in retrospect, noted times when a display of "Alpha" traits before my high school students (all girls) got me results that nothing else did. But here's where we seem to differ. When it comes specifically to attracting the opposite sex, I draw a distinction between Game and what I call Fascination. I have yet to find a woman who has used tactics designed for men to get her boyfriend to propose to her or to improve her marriage. But if you can show me one example, then I will be . . . fascinated! ;-)
Now imagine I'll drive by a forum today where there was a discussion about whether Jews should continue having access to high education, and if so should their access be limited to only certain professions that fit some predefined roles assigned to Jews. Do you think I'd be justified in being angry?
With respect to you, I think you misunderstood the context of that discussion or were attributing the opinions of commenters on another blog to ST and the commenters on this one. The original point was that pursuit of higher education might make a woman think that too many men who are elible to be her husbands are actually "beneath" her--and that was Private Man's point, not ST's. You might have noticed that ST explicitly said, "I disagreed wholeheartedly with [PM] that the solution was to stop educating women." (Emphasis mine.)
There were some commenters on PM's post who thought that women should not go to college at all. But I just reread the thread after ST's post and nobody said that on this blog.
....weird, did my comment get caught in spam filter?
Maybe it was the language.... Sorry Spacetraveller, I got worked up. Rarely happens.
Feel free to edit the language if you want and post it.
@SYH
Tell me about the men that approaches you for a date, or some coffee.
Ceer:
...look for marriageable women to date. Open up in the same polite manner in which I treat men, build a cordial relationship, and build off of that into a stable marriage of mutual love and respect.
My reply:
This struck me as a similar strategy taught to "nice girls," and it is not uncommon that numbers of them wind up in a similar boat, single long after they imagined they would be married.
Now it is certainly feasible that they are only noticing the types of guys that everyone wants, the "tingle-generating types," but it does lead them to wonder what they are doing wrong.
So they might figure, well, it must be that being "nice" is not what they should be doing, so why even bother?
Or because they are not offering sex off the bat (that nice girl home training), and the girls who get the attention are offering sex, well they might believe they really have nothing to offer that the "tingle-generating guys" want....
PVW
@SYH…
The only way you will be convinced that I am genuinely a nice guy and not an alpha wannabe is through long and frequent association with me.
From my perspective however, why should I make that investment of time and energy in you?
You read a couple of internet blogs and you turn your back on me?
You’re gone and it has nothing to do with the way I treated you, not any lack on my part of respect or affection toward you personally. No, some anonymous blog on the internet has more sway over your actions and thinking than someone who has invested personally in you.
To my complete dismay, this kind of thing is painfully common among women and why so many good, decent men have decided to go their own way.
Before we even say hello you believe we are baboons and liars. Even if we work our butts off to overcome this skepticism you abandon us because of what now - some beta dude on the internet wishes he was an alpha so secretly I must be harboring the same aspirations and be lying to you?
Really?
What is it you bring to the table that is so wonderful that I should want to make the effort or take the risk in you?
You may not like your red pill sisters, but I can tell you with conviction they are highly prized by men.
Grasshopper
SYH and ST:
But that aside,
"Most women posting in these blogs/forums are anti-feminist and often social ultra-conservative and don't represent the average woman any more than the most aggressive feminists do."
Correct on both counts. Although as I mention above, there are notable exceptions. But still, we coexist peacefully with the exceptions...
Me (PVW):
Antifeminist? No, definite feminist leanings here, but in opposition to certain types, ie., the more extreme Andrea Dworkin type of radical feminism. I also don't like the prevailing "sex positive" feminism discussed recently in Hanna Rosin's Atlantic magazine article, "Boys on the Side."
Ultraconservative? No, definite conservative leanings here, but not to the extent of our blog host and one or two other female commenters.
@B… “…Grasshopper in particular may remember my own (ill-concealed?) emotional reaction to the "boner test." …”
That is the appeal of a place like this B. Because we are all anonymous we are freer to speak our minds and even have emotional reactions than we would in our own face to face social worlds where the stakes are higher and the potential consequences more severe.
You can also do research and test understanding of the opposite sex in ways not possible in your off-net world. I mean try having a serious conversation with you church singles group on the boner test – not going to happen – may even be excommunicated for that!
Grasshopper
@ Leap,
I couldn't find the comment you allude to! I checked the spam filter and it wasn't there... Not sure what happened. Would it be possible to repost it? Perhaps it never went through at all. I'd be interested to read it :-)
@ Bell,
Many thanks for clarifying the point about women and education for me.
SYH, by all means disagree with me...but please please be clear on what my argument is first. That simplifies the discussion that follows. Now, because you clearly misunderstood what my point in that education post was all about, you ended up being offended when in fact, had you properly understood it, you might not have been.
Let me re-iterate the issue again. I do NOT think that educating a woman per se is the cause of her subsequent marital failures if she gets any. Afterall, several women commenters here are highly educated and successfully and happily married. As Bellita said, it is the (wrong) attitude that goes with it, i.e. many men who are otherwise perfect are 'beneath' her, so she keeps looking for a man with higher and higher qualifications...
That's the first problem. And then the second one is that when she is actually married, her education is not used as a tool to help her husband or the family, but as a weapon to compete against him with...
Look, I am not even saying it is any specific woman's fault if she does this. As Ceer explained, same as men have been lied to, so have women. We have all been lied to in certain ways. All I am saying is, we can use our education in better ways than society has taught us...And guess what will happen? Many more men might actually be supportive of women's education in that case. Instead of the kind of attitude where they are complaining...Well, you might say, who cares about a bunch of men complaining online? We do. As women, we will come to care what men think sooner or later...
I am afraid I take issue with you on another point. I do not accept that anything I say about 'women' is interchangeable with 'Jew' or 'Black' or 'Indian' or any other race! That kind of thinking leads to erroneous and disastrous consequences for society. It was a very clever trick used by feminists to push their agenda when they tried to sell feminism to Black women (who by the way have not really benefitted (as a general group) from the 'spoils of feminism', so to speak).
I remember during the last US electons, the voting choice was essentially whittled down to a choice between a Black man for President (Obama) and a White woman for Vice-president (Palin). Can you see why this comparison could have enraged Black men? I won't go there. It is slightly off-topic, but I would caution this kind of 'apples and pears' comparison. A man is a man no matter what colour he is. A woman is a woman no matter what colour she is. I really hope I don't have to go into why a law (let's suppose such a law exists) which 'denies' a woman of any race her 'right' to reach the glass ceiling in the military against all the odds, is entirely not at all comparable to a similar law which prevents a man of any race to cater for himself and his family by denying him a job he could perhaps do better than the woman above by virtue of nothing else other than his physical strength...
I don't buy your race analogy at all. Gender and race are two entirely different issues...And besides, I do think that another side effect of the Red Pill is this very realisation...
@ PVW,
Hahahaha, I had you in mind as one of the 'exceptions' actually, so I am glad you chimed in. I have not always agreed with you on some issues, but thanks to your patience with me and logical arguments, I can at least see where you are coming from on those issues on which we disagree.
SYH, by the way, a good few of my posts begin with a variation of "...I saw this on a Manosphere blog and I disagree with it. Here's why..." I didn't actually swallow the Red Pill whole. I mashed it up and took what I wanted, leaving out the bits I found unpalatable.
Each to his own. I did what I felt was best for me. You are also clearly doing what you think is best for you.
I say Amen to that!
I have a question of fundamental importance to ask you:
How would you define "Red Pill" woman?
To understand why you keep saying that I am wrong about generalising the attitude of Red Pill women towards men, I need to understand what YOU mean by the term "Red Pill woman".
I shall kick off with my own personal definition. Is this in accordance with yours?
Red Pill woman, to me, is a woman who has understood (finally) that the world we live in is full of hidden agendas set by a feminist core of people (men and women but 'fronted' by women)whose message has spread like wildfire. Red Pill woman understands that the basic issue underlying this ill in society, is the lack of respect of men, by women. (Sad but true). Therefore Red Pill woman knows that to correct this ill (and it IS an ill - no doubt about it), on an individual as well as a population level, the first step is to respect men in general, and of course one or more in particular. Everything else flows easily from there.
That is why I insist that respect of men is pathognomonic of Red Pill woman, and why I find your assertion of the opposite scenario at odds with my own definition of Red Pill woman. Maybe our definitions of Red Pill woman differ? That would certainly explain why we seem to be talking past each other on this issue.
Perhaps this needs to be addressed in a whole new post? I await your answer then maybe I move this discussion into another thread...
Bell,
Be my guest. Literally. Hahahahaha!
I don't care where you post, here or over at yours. But please keep posting in the Gendersphere. Each time you stop, I miss some oxygen...
:-)
Grasshopper,
"What is it you bring to the table that is so wonderful that I should want to make the effort or take the risk in you?"
Thank you for this direct question to SYH.
Gone are the days when marriage was offered on a plate to women by men. Now we have to earn it. We women got ourselves into this situation. Now we have to get ourselves out of it. And guess who is teaching us how to get ourselves out of it?
The men of The Manosphere, SYH.
We should be grateful to them!
This line by Grasshopper should already make you think, no?
This and similar lines by men like Grasshopper have made me reflect over the past months. I would say my life is better for it, as I am sure a lot of the other female commenters would attest to. And I would hope that the men also get something out of interacting with us. I find nothing wrong with this situation...
Au contraire, I find it superb.
"I mean try having a serious conversation with you church singles group on the boner test – not going to happen – may even be excommunicated for that!"
Grasshopper, the very fact that Catholic women like Bell and I are using words like 'boner test' is a travesty :P
I am friends with several nuns and priests. They would be shocked if they learned that I use words like this, nevermind discussing issues like this with them!
Excommunication would be the mercy option in that case!
Hahahahaha!
I have it on good authority that the last Catholic woman to use the phrase 'boner test' in public did not make it out of Mass one Sunday...According to eyewitnesses, men in white coats...um, actually black cassocks...appeared from nowhere and...
(Take note, Bellita)
Hahahahahahaha!
Marellus,
You had a double post. I deleted one of them.
Hi, ST, PVW here.
You have an interesting take as a British woman (presumably of European descent) living in Europe responding to the election of 2008.
It is true, there were issues regarding Palin and Obama in the election, but the major gender-race conflict with respect to that election took place in the context of the Democratic primary, between Hillary Clinton and Obama.
Some serious hard core 1st wave feminists (like Gloria Steinhem) came out with daggers drawn over whether women should support Obama, including black women.
Yes, ST, I realized your point about my being an "exception" through our discussions of the "pretty young feminist" post!
As for "red pill" women, I find it striking there has to be a term for women who were raised to treat men as well as women with simple decency and respect.
I don't think I would have ever defined myself as a "red pill woman," but I do know that decency and respect are hallmark values for everyone to cultivate.
Grasshopper's points were good ones, I thought, and it was what I had in mind when I responded to Ceer.
Many "nice girls" have the "what they bring to the table" part correct, but it is a matter of using that to attract the men that appeal to them.
But are the men they are interested in "taking the bait?" Their "sisters" who only bring sex to the table seem to win much easier because they meet the boner test easily and take it from there.
Beyond that, the "nice girls" might not have as much awareness of smv calculations; it is not always part of "nice girls" education when they were growing up--how to use smv to reel men in. But they are often well trained in developing a very high mmv. However, smv is often what gets noticed first.
@ST
Marellus,
You had a double post. I deleted one of them.
Send me a bill.
@ PVW,
"You have an interesting take as a British woman (presumably of European descent) living in Europe responding to the election of 2008."
No! I am afraid your assumption would be incorrect, PVW :-)
And you are right, I forgot about the Clinton/Obama thing, which was the more important Black man/White woman 'contest'.
No matter what races are involved, whenever a man is pitted aginst a woman, his competitive nature will always be stronger than hers, no matter how much artificial testosterone she acquires :-)
This is not to say that he will necessarily win, but he will compete harder, for sure. And he can't lose...To a man, it must be awful to lose to a woman. Perhaps this is a dirty locker room to enter. Could the men here elaborate on this for me?
I daresay some women are savvy enough to avoid competing with a man, especially a man they are 'involved' with, i.e. bf or husband, but I can see that sometimes it is unavoidable, eg. at work. It is tricky to negotiate this one...
There is a woman I know who can manage this type of thing very well. She regularly 'beats' men, but she does it in such a way that no-one realises she has 'won'. She is a real pro :-)
Marellus,
Bill's in the post.
Hahahahahahaha!
Bellita,
I meant to ask you this yesterday, but in my haste to depart I forgot.
You mentioned a woman who after taking the Red Pill realised her husband would probably be attracted to the girlfriends of her baby son one day.
This takes me back to the point of this post.
Using your example, what should this woman do with this realisation?
(This is the perfect example to use, Bell. Thanks for providing it!).
Should she...
1. Secretly hope that her son turns out gay?
2. Ban all of her son's girlfriends from the house until her husband is old and blind?
3. Watch her husband like a hawk the minute son starts bringing girls home?
4. Accept that her husband will want to sleep with his son's girlfriends and warn the son about this?
5. Warn the girls they might be tha target of her husband?
I realise this is a ridiculous group of possible strategies...
In many ways I am deliberately being facetious. But it is an important point I am trying to get to.
What should this woman do, or indeed is there anything she ought to do? Everyone has given very valid but abstract answers so far to my question above.
How could I negotiate using Red Pill knowledge assuming I were the woman in this example?
I appreciate the abstract answers, I do!
But if you don't mind, also provide me with a practical one.
(Yes, we women are never satisfied, are we? lol).
We always want a little more...
:-)
Go on, indulge me please...
Perhaps Bellita could pass on the answers to this woman for whom this is areal-life situation?
At least for me this still remains somewhat hypothetical...until I am married with sons!
PVW,
"As for "red pill" women, I find it striking there has to be a term for women who were raised to treat men as well as women with simple decency and respect."
I join you in feeling sad on this one...
"Many "nice girls" have the "what they bring to the table" part correct, but it is a matter of using that to attract the men that appeal to them....
But they are often well trained in developing a very high mmv. However, smv is often what gets noticed first."
So true! I agree. Life is cruel because of this...
But like everything else, this little hurdle can be overcome.
@ST… “…Thank you for this direct question to SYH…”
And that takes me back to the question you asked in the OP... i.e. …what do we do with this knowledge…
Ask that question. Pre Red Pill I never asked it.
Red Pill women will be prepared with an answer. Blue Pill women have a non-answer of one variety or another.
Grasshopper
@ST
Many thanks for clarifying the point about women and education for me.
You're very welcome! :)
Gender and race are two entirely different issues...And besides, I do think that another side effect of the Red Pill is this very realisation...
What a fascinating insight! I'll have to think about this some more . . .
How would you define "Red Pill" woman?
This was addressed to SYH, but I found your definition interesting, ST, so I shall chime in, too. (What? You invited me to be your guest!) While I dislike using terms like "red pill" because they get in the way of explaining these concepts to people unfamiliar with the Manosphere, I would define a "red pill woman" simply as a woman who understands that men and women are completely different and that "what women want" should not be conflated with "what is good for society." For me, this has less to do with respect (although that is essential) than with the ability to see things from the male perspective. But even for very empathetic women that can be really tricky. For many women, putting themselves in a man's shoes amounts to no more than putting themselves in the shoes of a woman in the same situation as the man. And that's really not the same thing.
What should this woman do, or indeed is there anything she ought to do?
The frustrating short answer is: There's nothing she can do! :P
But that's not really a problem. There are millions of married men who are attracted to women who aren't their wives every day and still manage to be completely faithful. And the woman I've mentioned knows her husband to be a man of good character and she trusts him to be faithful to her. She just kind of wishes she didn't have such a clear idea of how sexual attraction works for men! This is one case in which ignorance just may be bliss!
@Grasshopper
Red Pill women will be prepared with an answer. Blue Pill women have a non-answer of one variety or another.
I am reminded of the parable of the wise and foolish virgins . . .
Ugh, sure I'll try one last time to post this. Just for you, space traveller. Combination of my phone or computer has apparently eaten it four times already.
@Someone You'll Hate
I'll skip a rant about hooking up smart. Suffice to say, Susan is an upper middle class (somewhat)ex-feminist over the age of 50. She blogs solely because she likes the ego boost of feeling important, influential, and reinforcing her own worldviews/life choices. She has driven away female readers with her paranoid defense of her opinions and banning users that disagree even when presented with reasonable, respectful discussions based on fact. Most of these were male commenters that had shown themselves of quality, but some females as well. When they left, so did a lot of the good discussions.
As for your replacing "women" with "Jewish".... Like Space Traveller, I think your claim is an exaggeration and completely unbased in reality. Women, as a class, have enjoyed the most privilege over the course of human history than any other group. Think about this - while women were 'forced' to stay at home, men were out there sweating, crying, bleeding, and dying to provide and protect for women. Our life span is shorter on average for this very reason. If there has ever been a way for men as a class to sacrifice themselves for women's benefit, they have done so.
Also remember that, until 50 years ago, probably 85% or more of jobs were simply professions women physically or psychologically couldn't handle. Biology and evolution designed you to monopolize on your ability to nurture and raise a family - what has certainly been a full time job through most of human history (and I would argue still is, though for different reasons. Less physical work of cleaning/cooking/making clothes, more moral work because of a lack of communities to instill proper behavior in people). Regardless, this consumed all of a woman's life and, contrary to what feminism teaches, men weren't better off. If they weren't fully consumed with sweating, bleeding, and dying for you and could also get an education (remember, most men never could read and it boggles the mind that feminism teaches women weren't educated when most men weren't either), the educations SOLE purpose for the man was either to be able to BETTER sweat, bleed, and die for you through his job or through entering the swamp and stress of politics to forge a safe community from scratch for you.
So please, don't disservice Jewish history of being oppressed in nearly every era in nearly every area of the world by comparing a group that had to go through the concentration camps to Women's preferential treatment. You do a disservice to each group.
Second, I'm incredibly offended by your reference and disgust in men by comparing them to baboons. Like you're some clean, pure fucking woman that can do no wrong.
As with everything in gender issues, there's a mirror to this that you're refusing to look in. If men are baboons, women are parrots. You do nothing but try to look good, talk, nest build, try to attract a mate, make a family and shit all over the jungle floor with no regard as to whats below. Because hey, it doesn't affect your world, right?
Meanwhile, you're seeing nothing of the qualities of men, though I'd argue men are more like Chimps than baboons. YOU, personally as an individual, might only see our displays, the things that disgust you. You fail to see us creating tools. Creating a society and a community with each other. You ignore the protection we've given you as a group of chimps fighting off the wild, you assume that those trees you're living in just appeared and have never been threatened by snakes, infested with bugs, or tended to ensure they grow properly. We take the pains to forge and carve out a nice, safe little clearing for you to fly down and build your nest.
And, surprisingly, we still love you despite the fact that you're made up of things that are completely opposite of us. We ask that continue to be yourself. That you preen and look good, but for the purpose of pleasing us. That you talk, but not screech at us. That you nest, and not neglect the nest as we tend to protecting it and giving you the materials to build it. That you continue to work to attract us, as we continue to work to provide, protect, and lead you. That the family you raise is ours and not some other man's. That you stop shitting all over everything, and simply not shit over the things that matter to us. Feel free to continue shitting over things we don't care about.
In exchange for our sacrifices of sweat, blood, tears, and lives.... Well, to men it seems like you're getting a sweet fucking deal. So when you then take that sweet deal and fuck with us, we resent it for very understandable and valid reasons. That you then take the knowledge of what men are, while ignoring the flaws of women, of hypergamy, of sacrifice, of evolution that also come with the red pill.... That you use that cherry picked knowledge to come to hate men while raising yourself on an even higher pedestal.... Well, you're setting yourself up for a massive fall.
You'll either change your mind in time to have a family, or you're outpricing yourself in the sexual and marriage market. Honestly, I hope you change your mind if you have any desire to fulfill your biological or spiritual imperatives of passing on your genetics and faith; but if you continue to ignore facts and be willfully ignorant when you've found your way here....
Well. You stop gaining any pity from me for your mistakes.
@ Grasshopper,
"And that takes me back to the question you asked in the OP... i.e. …what do we do with this knowledge…
Ask that question."
Good point!
This is an excellent practical way of using this knowledge to full effect.
One of you gentlemen should be proposing a guest post entitled 'You know you've met a Red Pill woman when she does or says...'
Any takers? :-)
We are all familiar with what constitutes a Red Pill man by now.
What I don't know is how you men define a Red Pill woman.
Having a 'non-answer' to your above question is a clear exclusion criterion for what you are looking for, Grasshopper.
Any other gentlemen with similar exclusion/inclusion criteria here?
I am interested to know...
Yes, for selfish purposes :-)
But jokes aside, I think it would be helpful for women who are not yet married to know.
What they do with this knowledge is up to them of course.
Another point I think I should bring up now (and which might be 'controversial' to some degree) is whether a woman or man can be labelled 'Red Pill' unless they have received the 'seal of approval' by other Red Pillers.
This sounds a bit like college 'initiation rites' or something, but can this be a useful concept in The Manosphere?
Can I really call myself Red Pill if those who coined the term 'Red Pill' disagree that I am what they define it to be?
I ask this because to take the Red Pill is to gain entry into some kind of 'club', no?
If no-one accepts you into this 'club' you are not a member.
Is this a valid way of looking at things?
Or is this another example of my out-cof-control hamster having another trip on an illegal substance?
:-)
Bell,
How do you do it?
The parable of the wise and foolish virgins is exactly the right anaology for this context.
Way to go, Bellita!
You somehow always manage to provide examples of where the Bible meets The Manosphere lol.
JV did this with the story of Esther a while back. I remember being very impressed with that analogy. I feel the same now reading your latest comment.
Wow, am I reeling from your insights...
See? This is why you simply shouldn't stop posting. It would be a travesty.
Or a Greek tragedy.
(Of both varieties).
:-)
Apparently your comments have a limited length and my rant went too long. Hence why my computer ate it before. Glad I retyped this one in a word doc.
Space Traveler, you'll probably like this definition:
http://marriedmansexlife.com/2012/08/what-exactly-is-a-red-pill-woman/
I personally would define a red pill woman the same as I would a man, actually. The red pill is simply the KNOWLEDGE of seeing the world as it is with the lies and deceptions going on in the current SMV and culture. What they do with it doesn't make them any more or less red pill - hence the different reactions you see in men - PUA, MGTOW, MRA, and people that combine it like myself. Women can do with it as they will, though like I said to SYH, I don't think you can call someone who willfully ignores parts of the knowledge a true red pill person, but simply someone who's cherry picking ideas to reinforce their world view without changing it.
This very thing is what I have against people like Susan.
@ Someone You'll Hate
I forgot to type this out, but if you want a man's perspective on the things I think you're missing you can check out my blog posts "History of Modern Hypergamy" and "The Stones of Masculinity". They're written in response to my thoughts on past posts here and at another woman's blog, Stingray, so you'll likely be able to stomach them.
Or, if you want a female voice, check out Girl Writes What's video "Benevolent Sexism" on youtube.
@ Leap,
I am so glad you were able to preserve your comment too!
Whoa! What a comment!
Now let me tell you that I found myself stunned at its brutal frankness, but I also know that you are speaking from your heart and as such, I can't argue with anything you say, even if I found something to argue about (which I don't).
A year ago, despite knowing things were 'not right', I still wouldn't have been capable of completely 'getting' your comment in the fullness of the meaning you wish to convey to me and other women.
And now I think Bellita has provided an excellent reason why I might not have 'got' it.
It would most likely be because I would have been 'putting myself in the shoes of a woman in the same situation as a man' which doesn't quite work when it come to understanding a man's point of view.
One needs to go a little bit further down that road to see more clearly into the male heart.
A good example of this is someting JV said in response to CD's complaint that men were less chaste than women (in her post about Danny).
JV explained that Catholic young women go out to work, pay their bills and still manage not to ratch up that notch count, so they are not impressed when Catholic men cannot do the same.
Well, CD would have been putting herself in a woman's shoes, and not a man's shoes when she made this complaint. And in so doing, she takes out some important factors in the equation (eg. testosterone) and therefore any man reading her comment automatically sees it as invalid. Because they are thinking: 'well, let's see how you feel about chastity when you have as much of a sex drive as I have...'
I second what you say about Jewish history not being the right parallel for women's history.
Apples and oranges. One cannot compare the two. At all.
There are other aspects to your comment I need to respond to. But alas, late for Mass already as it is. I'll have to come back later...
@ Space Traveler
" I also know that you are speaking from your heart and as such, I can't argue with anything you say, even if I found something to argue about (which I don't)."
Please, don't feel the need to hold back on a discussion. While I feel strongly about my opinions, I've also immersed myself in studying what my own intelligence level is able to understand about the vast amount of knowledge that applies to the SMV. Mostly history, with a moderate amount of evo-psyche and biology. I've been focusing on improving myself before improving my knowledge of how we 'got here' as a race, but when I run out of leadership books, self help books, PUA stuff, I have only philosophy and biology left. Even then I sprinkle those in to my reading.
Anyways, I attempt to keep my mind open and have no problem parsing through studies like the Myers-Briggs on divorce to draw my own conclusions. Listening to your thoughts, as someone I get along with and agree with most of the time, shouldn't prove too difficult ;)
Spacetraveller said...
@ PVW,
"You have an interesting take as a British woman (presumably of European descent) living in Europe responding to the election of 2008."
No! I am afraid your assumption would be incorrect, PVW :-)
PVW: You're a woman of color?
Other thoughts, thinking about some observations about Hooking Up Smart, I read posts over there, and I post once in a while.
I have found that the comments go on for too long over weeks, it seems, for me to take any time to follow. Who has that much time, again, to pursue anonymous conversations with people on the internet? I know I don't.
Beyond that, I have found some of the responses written by posters to be over the top in their belligerence, that I am just dumbfounded.
That is a lot of energy to put into a debate with an anonymous person on the internet. The name-calling, swearing, etc., for example, in the post she has right now about the BU hockey team.
For all these reasons, even though specific individuals might have something interesting to say or might have been curious enough to engage with me on something I might have said, I have no interest whatsoever. If I comment, it is to Susan directly, and that is it.
@ Leap,
I do like Athol's list! Thanks for linking to it. It is a very comprehensive list, I must say :)
The list reads very much like 'What a woman should be...'
It is also what I imagine a good Christian/Jewish/Muslim/whatever woman should be like.
The best self a woman can attain.
This brings me back to PVW's point that it is quite sad that we need a whole new phrase for this type of woman, because it isn't the 'norm' in society.
I really have nothing to say to counter your comment to SYH. I wish there were something I could pick at, but there genuinely isn't :P.
I find it odd that any woman would argue with what you say. All those specific requests about what a man wants, the nesting, having kids that are biologically the man's, etc. are all things that women would claim to want! So where's the problem? I don't see it...Maybe I need help spotting it.
As I see it, you say you want what women also say they want. I know I want all of the above, personally. Compatibilty of 'wish list' is a good start, yes.
@ PVW,
Correct.
I have no specific gripe with HUS except that important comments sometimes get 'lost' in the sheer length of the threads. But I see what you mean nonetheless. In a large crowd, name-calling, etc. becomes an (undesirable) feature that can easily occur, much easier than with a smaller community.
@ Marellus
"And the Red Pill will make you an 'alpha' ... or so it's said ... ha."
There are no Alphas. It's a concept with no referent, created by the Lost Boys of the Manosphere because they never learned to be men.
If you want to use that term, the bad Alpha used to be called a cad - and cads are cowards.
The good Alpha would be a chivalrous man.
Not surprisingly, each is completely opposed to the other. Which is why Alphas don't exist.
@ Bellita
Please, more posts!
@ ST
Thank you for your kind words.
As for male commenters describing a red pill woman......
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed some of the swipes being taken on blog posts about red pill women in the sphere?
Ultimately, I don't think that there will be consensus about red pill women. And it ties in with why I cannot be entirely red pill. Women aren't the only one's with hamsters. And there's male hamstering afoot.
You see, a distiction would make us "special". But, men need women the way a fish needs a bicycle. There are no special women in manosphere canon. We are all the same.
Or as Rollo says, all women are red pill.
Problem is, that goes against our biological imperitive. Nature compels us to seperate our selves. It also goes against male nature as most men are not narcissitic or sociopathic enough to be satisfied in relationships where there is no one special. Ever.
So, there's a lot of talk about femininity, and bringing to the table. But, if all women are red pill....and the same.....then there should be no difference to men one way or the other. And women's competitive nature would bottom out at whatever low bar is set by the herd. Because the herd is the same.
@ Bob,
Maybe the 'bad Alpha' is what SYH refers to as 'baboon'?
At least the 'bad alpha' traits. (Please correct me if I am wrong SYH).
You and her share the same view on the Greek letter thing, I notice :-)
It's a real pity that these bad guys do seem to get all the girls. But do they really? Or is it the case that in fact they only seem to get the bad girls?
Or the good girls that temporarily turn bad when these guys show up?
Hm, I dunno. What's true is that these men certainly seem to have a certain power over women that more deserving men don't seem to have. But that's the nature of life. PVW also makes the point of the more sexually attractive women getting noticed by men more than the more marriageable women.
It's the same principle, and a definite obstacle that both sexes have to negotiate to get what they want, which is presumably a stable longterm relationship with one person...
JV,
I don't understand - Rollo says all women are Red Pill?
Really?
That surprises me...
Under what context does he say this?
Could you also link to the swipes against Red Pill women that you mention? I can't say I have noticed anything of the sort yet...
@Bob Wallace
There are no Alphas. It's a concept with no referent, created by the Lost Boys of the Manosphere because they never learned to be men.
True.
So the question is an age old one then : How to be a better man ?
You did well in your spat with Vox Day.
His comeuppance is coming.
@ Bob Wallace
"There are no Alphas. It's a concept with no referent, created by the Lost Boys of the Manosphere because they never learned to be men."
I'll respectfully disagree with you. An alpha is a leader - whether it be a cad leader of 'bros' that doesn't care about women, an artist/musician, a gentleman, or an evil genius; there are leaders in this world and it is the characteristics they exhibit that generally attracts women. I don't agree with a lot of the 'Sphere that tries to parse down Alpha to a simple set of behaviors or 'game' as a description of all that is alpha, but they are VERY helpful in learning how to be confident and attractive to women.
But there are definitely 'alphas' and 'betas'. There always have been leaders and those that follow. Some characteristics change from generation to generation, but many stay the same because the underlying principles making up our psychology are slow to change (ie - evolution of biology and society).
@ Space Traveler
Eh. As for the list of things men want in women and your agreeing/wanting that list as well.... NAWALT. Specifically, biology has been given free reign in our society and it is only pockets of women that due to certain variables still have any femininity and self control. No offense, but even knowing you from your writing, if you showed up tomorrow in Chicago I'd still probably screen you to make sure your actions match your words. It is what it is.
As for HUS, meh. I personally am banned from it, and I feel for ridiculous reasons, so there's that. So was Yohami and Olive (Olive later unbanned), and she apparently started talking crap about Stingray. I can't respect her any more, she's shown she's not worthy of it and not to be trusted by her actions and her unwillingness to see the truth on specific issues, then selling false images to her readers.
@ Marcellus,
"True.
"So the question is an age old one then : How to be a better man ?
"You did well in your spat with Vox Day.
"His comeuppance is coming."
It took me a while to figure Day out. Roissy was easier.
Any guy who is a narcissistic blowhard on the surface is doing it to cover up the nearly-unbearable feeling he is a wimp.
When Day told me I didn't know what I was talking about, and was an idiot and a fraud, I knew he had clicked on my site and read some of my articles. Day is one of those guys who babbles about he has Dark Triad traits, and is an Alpha....all of it to disguise his fear is a wimp.
There is about 3000 years of thought about what a man is. These poor guys today can quote the definitions of Alpha, Beta, etc., but they have no idea what Marcus Aurelius wrote about self-control. They don't even know who he is.
They have no understanding of the true definition of chivalry, which evolved from Christianity and is based on the better warrior virtues - to protect the weak and powerless, to mete out justice, to not lie and steal, to be noble. That is part of what a man is supposed to be.
As for men who are cads who are supposed to be Alphas, I have met several. They are all cowards, and all are ruled by women because they are altering their characters and behavior in hopes of getting laid. The cure for this was noticed a long time ago: a man becomes a coward when he degrades himself merely to have sex with a lot of women.
These questions were covered in the past. Not looking there shows an ignorance of past thinkers that verges on pathetic.
@ Leap,
"No offense, but even knowing you from your writing, if you showed up tomorrow in Chicago I'd still probably screen you to make sure your actions match your words. It is what it is."
None taken. I'll have you know that I now expect this of men, and I watch out for this. If a man is not 'vetting' a woman, same as the woman is vetting him, I shall worry that something is missing. I do this on behalf of my female friends too, much to their annoyance, because I am not asking 'why are you tolerating him?' anymore. I am asking them, 'why is he tolerating you ?' if they have done something that I know a Red Pill man (or any man for that matter should not tolerate. Um, is this why I am a pariah? lol.
But hey, no eye-rolling please. I don't go over to the guys and say, 'Look mate, my friend is walking all over you. Time to ramp up the 'Dread Game' on her.
No. I know when to keep my mouth shut. In any case I know I only enjoy these 'Game' principles when they are coming from a good place. One always feels it when it turns 'dark'.
Which it might do in the wrong hands...
I also have more 'checks' on my own behaviour - something I don't recognise myself for in my not-too-distant past lol.
I am more aware of the occasions when I overstep a line than ever before. And I do recognise when a man is doing the same, I think. Not always sure what to do with situations like these, hence this post, but at least I am aware of what's happening around me. This awareness is blessing enough.
@ Bob,
Is Marcus Aurelius...Marellus?
Hahahahaha!
Sorry, couldn't resist that particular wordplay. Too tempting...
Now you have given me some homework, I see. I never heard of Marcus Aurelius before. A clear gap in my knowledge-base. Time to put that right...
Thanks for that information.
@ Bell,
I read your comment again, and something hit me.
"I would define a "red pill woman" simply as a woman who understands that men and women are completely different and that "what women want" should not be conflated with "what is good for society."
It used to be true that 'what women want' was synonymous with 'what is good for society'.
Not anymore.
Which is why your statement above applies to the current situation and not necessarily to 100 years ago when the two were one and the same thing.
I think when women stopped being 'altruistic' and stopped thinking 'what's best for the family/ the community', and started thinking more along the lines of 'how can I please myself, who gives a monkeys what the kids or the husband need' we started getting EPL, higher divorce rate than 'normal', higher unmarried mum rate than usual, sinking society, etc etc. The men of course played their part in this, but I think the bigger problems came from women, because afterall, as women go, so goes society. It is never true that 'as men go, so goes society'. because men build 'civilisation', and not 'society'.
An example of 'what women want' which used to be synonymous with 'what is good for society', aka 'what society needs' is...marriage.
But....I hear someone say. Women still want marriage today! It is the men who are refusing to commit!
Um, only half-true.
The problem is that many women today really just want a wedding. Not the same thing.
Until 'what women want' becomes unified with 'what society needs', we will continue to swim in the bog mire.
So, to make a long story short, we are faced with two solutions, as women:
Either we change our collective desires to be more closely linked with what whould benefit society as a whole, or we do indeed act as you suggest, Bell, which is to separate our (selfish) wants from what we know to be good for society and stop trying to convince ourselves and everyone else that the two are closely related. Because we know deep in our hearts that they are as far apart as Mercury and Pluto...
In this acse, it is the dishonesty which is the more troubling evil, and not the desire for selfish wants...
We need to get genuine as a group. The lies are eating us up...
@JV
But, if all women are red pill....and the same.....then there should be no difference to men one way or the other.
But isn't that what you'll get if you take "There Will Always Be Another Woman" to its logical conclusion? :P Bob has compared some Manosphere bloggers to Gloria Steinem and Betty Freidan, who did not live the lifestyles they prescribed for other women. So they probably don't subscribe to this doctrine the way they want other men to.
I see why "There Will Always Be Another Woman" would be a necessary mantra if a newly dumped man who still had lot to offer a woman were convinced he would never have another relationship in his life. But there's not much sense in treating all women the same way . . . unless, of course, a man already believes, as a matter of dogma, that all women are the same. But in that case, what's the point of being with any woman?
Answer: None! So you might as well have fun with casual hookups for the rest of your life!
@ST
I am not asking 'why are you tolerating him?' anymore. I am asking them, 'why is he tolerating you ?'
Hahahaha! So am I, incidentally!
Do you know what always comes to mind when this issue is raised? A (really bad) movie from the 1980s called My Stepmother Is an Alien. There's a scene in which a young girl about to go on her first date says, "I hope he likes me!" And her kind, loving, well-meaning stepmother says, "I hope you like him." The implication is that the first statement involved wrong thinking and that the second statement involved correct thinking. But why is it more important for a woman to like a man than for a woman to like a woman? The second statement alone is as bad as the first statement alone. The right thing to say would have been, "I hope you both like each other."
@ST…
The ‘what do you bring to the table’ question is the only thing I’ve thought of so far as a way of screening for a woman’s red pill quotient. So you have my entire list already.
And this question will only work if the woman is attracted to you in the first place. So one still has to play the attraction game unfortunately. And then there is timing aspect of the question.
This is why I don’t like lists or rules – too many caveats.
...
“…PVW also makes the point of the more sexually attractive women getting noticed by men more than the more marriageable women…”
In a sense I understand the disappointment women feel about this, I felt the same way when I realized women with bikini model looks were not going for me. I am a good marriageable man, shouldn’t that alone attract the best looking women?
Painful fact for both genders to deal with – being a good person does not necessarily make you attractive to the opposite sex. You may be steak but you’ve got to sizzle too as B puts it.
Grasshopper
@JV… “…has anyone else noticed some of the swipes being taken on blog posts about red pill women…”
Only one but it was really just another AWALT rant. Even that one there was concession that some women were not but it was like playing Russian roulette, why take the chance.
I think a healthier approach is to find a means to filter for women who have taken the red pill themselves on gender relations. Instead of just complaining about it try to do something about it.
In this light I would ask you JV (or any of the female readers here) how would you as a woman display your red pill awareness on gender relations to a man you were attracted to?
I get your point that any given women might be a mixed bag both red and blue pills. Blue pill behavior is easy to spot. Red pill not so much. I’d hate to filter out a woman based on some blue pill thing she did once.
Grasshopper
@Leap.
I'll respectfully disagree with you. An alpha is a leader - whether it be a cad leader of 'bros' that doesn't care about women, an artist/musician, a gentleman, or an evil genius; there are leaders in this world and it is the characteristics they exhibit that generally attracts women.
I don't agree with a lot of the 'Sphere that tries to parse down Alpha to a simple set of behaviors or 'game' as a description of all that is alpha, but they are VERY helpful in learning how to be confident and attractive to women.
You have a point, but then you must also admit that Inner Game has a lot in common with a great philosophy like that espoused by Marcus Aurelius.
@ST
Is Marcus Aurelius...Marellus?
Hahahahaha!
Sorry, couldn't resist that particular wordplay. Too tempting.
One of these days I'm gonna graffiti your name on the second largest anthill in the Kalahari Desert.
Now go on my darling ... Oh I know you're dying of curiosity :
...why oh why the second largest anthill ?! ... why not the largest anthill ?! ... ooooh but if I ask him, I might get Marellified !!! ... no no no no ... better not ask him ... but it's the second largest anthill ... why ?! why ?! why ?! ... I've gotta know !!! ... oh shit ... I'm gonna get Marellified !!! ... NO NO NO !!!"
Say 'please', and I shall explain to you in a civil manner ... my darling ... I promise.
@ Bellita
"Bob has compared some Manosphere bloggers to Gloria Steinem and Betty Freidan, who did not live the lifestyles they prescribed for other women. So they probably don't subscribe to this doctrine the way they want other men to."
Friedan and Steinem lived their lives the exact opposite of what they prescribed.
Friedan married a rich man, had kids, did no housework (maids) and never had a job except for pontificating.
Steinem has been described by a biographer as "a hopeless romantic, dependent on men, and a serial monogamist."
Does anyone really believe Roissy lives the life he prescribes for men? I've never seen him mention any specific women. All Roosh can sayis, I banged this chick, I banged this chick. Even if he was, I've seen what happens to those guys when they reach middle age: alone, full of regrets, unhappy
As for Vox Day, he posted a picture of himself holding a sword and showing off his 16-inch biceps. My experience with guys who do that, along with bragging about their martial arts experience, is that they are generally 5'6 to 5'8" - short for an American. He cannot tolerate criticism, either. I strongly suspect his greatest fear is that he is a weakling, a wimp,
All these men are close to creating "vain philosophies" (a Biblical term) right out of their heads. That puts them into the same league as L. Ron Hubbard and Ayn Rand - I know the truth, follow me and you'll be happy, and anyone who disagrees with me is stupid or evil.
On the other hand, I tell people, don't believe me. Instead, look at 3000 years of what a man (and woman) is supposed to be, and make up your own mind.
@ grasshopper
How would someone know I'm red pill?
I'd take the time to show it and display it. But, that takes time. I would also bring up certain things in conversation.
But we live in a very busy paced world, so no doubt there would be the risk of being overlooked on those traits by letting them unfold.
Grasshopper:
In this light I would ask you JV (or any of the female readers here) how would you as a woman display your red pill awareness on gender relations to a man you were attracted to?
Just visiting:
How would someone know I'm red pill?
I'd take the time to show it and display it. But, that takes time. I would also bring up certain things in conversation.
my reply (PVW):
I think this fits into something someone mentioned earlier about being annoyed that a woman like SYH would presume that he is an alpha-ish baboon just by reading what she saw on a blog but without the intensive getting to know him from personal interaction.
So it isn't a one way street, what I think of as mutual discernment. I'm willing to get to know him and see what he is like, without presumptions. Can he do the same?
If it a red pill man, the question is whether the man in question can filter out all of the things he reads on blogs (if he read them, but especially any stereotypes he has heard of) about what I'm supposed to be like, and see me for who and what I am?
If I were single and looking, the question would be, does a man presume that because I have been successful in a career that has traditionally been male-dominated that I'm some evil career (w)itch? Does he presume that because I work a lot in a field associated with the evil "f word" of feminism that I'm a feminazi?
So what would I be like in "proving" that I'm not "like them?" It would mean just being my usual level-headed, considerate, self. The thing is, what I am doesn't fit in with the stereotypes anyway, and that would be obvious from him getting to know me.
@ Grasshopper,
"In this light I would ask you JV (or any of the female readers here) how would you as a woman display your red pill awareness on gender relations to a man you were attracted to?"
It is easy to display when one is already attracted to a man, Grasshopper!
I think the challenge is really to display Red Pill wisdom to men in general to whom one is NOT atrracted.
But that aside, to answer your question, I would simply say 'show respect' and 'ownership'.
If I didn't know this before, I certainly do now. That men really really REALLY need to be respected for what they do. I see easily now how that explains everything in my interaction with men in general, from my boss at work to the guy who sells the newspapers at the tube station.
'Ownership' however applies only to a specific man though, or to men like one's father, brother, male cousin, or even one's male orbiter lol.
What I mean by this is that you see it as very much your place to look after things for him that no-one else possibly could. It is easiest to do this in marriage (I imagine) but one can (and should) practise this well before that stage. I have noticed that in every man's life, there is usually one woman (current or past) who is his 'go to' woman for certain things, which may include something as simple as 'having a laugh with'. Even if a man has a huge harem, there is always one woman who is elevated above the rest in certain things.
For a man without a harem, it would be cool if a solitary woman could be the 'go to' woman for a LOT of the things he requires, maybe even all (heh!). A woman who is close to such a man can claim 'ownership' of this spot :-)
I think this is a very 'Red Pill' thing to do. And I think men enjoy it when women do this.
Do you agree Grasshopper?
Marellus,
Dear Lord, Marellus...
I know I'm ging to regret this...but...
Alsjeblieft...
lol.
@ Bob,
I read a bit about Marcus Aurelius. Interesting stuff. Thanks.
@Grasshopper
In this light I would ask you JV (or any of the female readers here) how would you as a woman display your red pill awareness on gender relations to a man you were attracted to?
Not sure if this is what you’re looking for since I am coming from the married perspective, but I don’t treat my husband as his wife so much as I treat him as a girlfriend. He leads, I follow; when we are out this looks like it would if we’re on a date and I wait on him to take me into the store, restaurant, wherever; I don’t jump ahead of him. I don’t talk down to him or berate him on anything he says. I talk him up and compliment him just as a girlfriend would talk up the man she started seeing. I smile at him often, especially with my eyes. I laugh at his jokes, even the corny ones I’ve heard a number of times. I know the things he likes most that I wear and I save those outfits for the weekend when we will be spending more time together so he can see me in them. The girlfriend behavior carries over to our interment times also. I don’t consider any of it a duty. I believe that when I might see any of these things as duty, then I’m on the way to ending my relationship.
When interacting with men I am more aware of how I talk to him, the eye contact and what kind. I am careful to not send out any misleading signals, but cordial and polite and I make sure not to forget to use 'please' and 'thank you'.
The thing that trips me up the most is when a man tries or asks to do something for me. On some sites I've read men angry that women only want to use men. But then I read that some men are still prone to hold a door open because it's in their nature. So when I was purchasing 25# weight plates and was asked if I wanted him to carry them out for me, I had to pause and ask which is the best answer. Would it be an insult to tell him no? Is he asking only because I'm a woman or would he ask a male customer the same thing? Am I taking advantage if I say yes? Red Pill doesn't give all the answers and I will not get it right all the time, but I am more aware and thinking. Maybe that is the best to come of it.
@ Spacetravalor
"I read a bit about Marcus Aurelius. Interesting stuff. Thanks."
Those today who believe those in the past did not discuss Game/PUA/Alpha/Beta (using different terms) are ignorant of history. They discussed these things thoroughly.
I remember some guy at this site parroted the definitions of Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc. Yet I guarantee you someone like him does not know what St. Augustine (who was a wild man when younger) wrote about being a man. Or Thomas Aquinas, or Aristotle, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, or anyone else.
@Someone you'll hate
"What you call "alpha males" I used to call "baboons". They just seemed unevolved, crude, crass, emotionally shallow, immature, emptyheaded, and consequently boring."
Cads. My experience, and that of many others, is that ultimately they're cowards. The Lost Boys of the Manosphere, who never learned what a man is, can't tell the difference between a cad and a chivalrous man.
@ST
My skat, as die miere daardie graffiti verwyder, gaan ek die miershoop opblaas met dinamiet.
En dan gaan ek 'n foto daarvan neem. En dan gaan ek jou naam graffiti op die grootste miershoop in die Kalahari.
En as die miere daardie graffiti wil verwyder, gaan ek vir hulle die foto van die vorige miershoop wys.
Maar jy moet sorg dat die leeus nie vir ons pla terwyl ek graffiti nie.
Want dan gaan ek vir daardie leeus moet graffiti, en dan is daar niks meer verf oor vir die miershoop nie.
@ Bob,
I read some of St. Augustine's thoughts...
Can't say I understood it much, but yes, it reads like a 'manual' for men. Perhaps The Manosphere has been in existence longer than we think?
:-)
@ Marellus,
If I didn't understand you in English...
Hahahahahahaha!
@JV… “…that takes time…”
This answer I understand completely.
Grasshopper
@PVW… “…does a man presume that because I have been successful in a career … that I'm some evil career (w)itch…”
No, I’ve posted my thoughts on this before on this blog – I see a woman’s income potential as an asset to the family. Except when the kids were very small I would expect my wife to be working. The better income she can command the better neighborhood we live in, better schools for the kids, etc.
Re: if she was one working in a feminist field….
It really boils down to how attractive she finds me. I guess I just have a hard time believing a true blue feminist would really be happy with a guy like me who has some philosophical differences of opinion on a subject she takes so seriously she’s made it her vocation.
It isn’t an entirely selfish what’s in it for me thing. For me to be happy with her I’d have to know she was happy with me too. That’s basic.
Grasshopper
@ST… “…I would simply say 'show respect' and 'ownership'…”
Yes. I have noticed displays of respect from women where it almost seemed they wanted me to notice they were being respectful. I’ve always replied with a sincere ‘Thank you I appreciate that’ but until your post today I had never thought of this scenario as an indicator of red pill awareness in the woman. From now on I will keep this in mind and Thank You for the insight!
The ‘ownership’ concept while very red pill does not lend itself to displays early on in courtship. This one would be more like a finding hidden treasure thing.
Grasshopper
@Jacquie… “…I don’t treat my husband as his wife so much as I treat him as a girlfriend…”
I think you are on to something here. I remember saying to an old girlfriend once – ‘…if you just treated me like you treat your female friends, we be much happier …”
I’m not quite sure how to filter for this quality early on though.
Grasshopper
Grasshopper:
Re: if she was one working in a feminist field….
It really boils down to how attractive she finds me. I guess I just have a hard time believing a true blue feminist would really be happy with a guy like me who has some philosophical differences of opinion on a subject she takes so seriously she’s made it her vocation.
Me (PVW):
Ah, but what if she works in a conservative feminist field, among those who have felt marginalized by mainstream feminists?
Feminists for life? Erica Bachiocchi, whom I mentioned before-independent scholar, mother to five children? The Independent Women's Forum?
@ Spacetraveller,
" read some of St. Augustine's thoughts...
Can't say I understood it much, but yes, it reads like a 'manual' for men. Perhaps The Manosphere has been in existence longer than we think"
The "Manosphere" has been around for thousands of years. Boys don't know how to become men unless older men instruct them. Traditionally, boys had to go through Rites of Passage, which meant taking them from their mothers and introducing them into the world of men. It could be brutal for more "primitive" peoples.
True Rites of Passage don't exist today, which is why some younger men are trying to create their own with those PUA/Game/Alpha delusions. That means they're not looking up to men, but boys pretending to be men.
@ Bob
I checked out your blog. Unfortunately, your com box doesn't like me, lol.
Bob's right. There's always was a male sphere of influence, safety, and communication. Men's spaces. Male clubs, sports, professions. Just like there always has been women.
Then feminism came and invaded all the men's spaces while staunchly guarding the female ones.
They've also slowly taken over rights of passage or made them so safe that the boys know they're not rights of passage and never grow through them. You see it in sports most these days - they've already eliminated them almost everywhere else. More and more pushes to make sports "safe" and injury free.
@ leap
As a mother, this has driven me nuts. It robs boys of self confidence. Without risk, they can't fully know their capabilities. It's not enough to give affirmations, especially if they think they haven't earned them. They will have doubts, and not "feel" confidence. It's our job as parents to be aware of this, and do our best to let boys own their defeats and successes.
And to not stand in the way of opportunities for them to develop their defeats and successes.
@ Grasshopper,
You're welcome!
You, like Bell, ask some rather hard questions, lol.
"The ‘ownership’ concept while very red pill does not lend itself to displays early on in courtship. This one would be more like a finding hidden treasure thing."
Yes, I think you're right here. I was slightly conflating 'someone you are already attracted to' with 'someone with whom you are in an established relationship'.
There is a big difference, of course...
"No, I’ve posted my thoughts on this before on this blog – I see a woman’s income potential as an asset to the family. Except when the kids were very small I would expect my wife to be working."
And this is an example of why I think I am not as 'rigid' as I claim to be, Grasshopper.
I do remember when you made this comment way back, and I was sure this was incompatible with my beliefs about the role of men and women.
Now I see your point. I think for me, it was a question of 'definition', as usual.
PVW also asked me once, 'What if he gets sick or dies? How are you going to manage finacially?' And I had a non-answer for her.
:-)
So now I think a good compromise is work by all means, but never let that get in the way of the greater good of the family. You give a perfect example - when the kids are young and need Mum at home or at least nearby (there are lots of jobs where you can have your child with you).
So there, you fixed that for me, lol.
"I think you are on to something here. I remember saying to an old girlfriend once – ‘…if you just treated me like you treat your female friends, we be much happier …” "
Did you really say this to a woman, Grasshopper??
I am feeling the need to hit a 'panic button' on reading this, you know...
You know how women treat each other, right? Trust me, you wouldn't want a woman to treat you like she treats another woman :P. Do you really want her telling you all her emotional stuff 24/7, hugging you incessantly (but no follow-on sex), expecting you to go shopping with her, expecting you to tell her all your feelings...
Grasshopper, be careful what you wish for, mate!
:-)
I think Jacquie meant that she was treating her husband as if she was still his girlfriend and not his wife, and not that she was treating her husband as if he were her girlfriend. (Please corect me if I am wrong, Jacquie).
Bob and Leap,
Yes, men can only be men if they were taught how to be so by older men.
I do believe that the inner city gang cultures we see are a direct result of this lack of 'proper' initiation and are a kind of 'faux' initiation 'made up' by these boys because most of them never had true male role models, aka fathers.
But Bob, I also think the Manosphere is (at least an attempt at) a return to the true form of initiation/male mentoring. Men like TPM really are mentoring young men in the ways of men. Danny is probably a younger version of this 'elder' type who is helping out younger men.
Yes, the PUAs have a 'one track' message to give, but even they are useful to some extent when it come to men's issues. As a woman, of course I am going to be disgusted by them. But they are not there for me...and neither are they there for you - a Christian man who would not do what they do. But there are men who really need the skills of a PUA, even if it is to help them get to a LTR.
You may remember me mentioning to a woman on Bell's blog who was very anti-Game, that she did not like Game because she did not need Game. I think the same may apply to you. You have done fine without Game. Good for you. But there are men (and women) out there who really do, if for nothing, just to get their foot on the ladder. You are already at the top of the ladder without that 'crutch' that Game provides, perhaps.
So Leap's point that men have no more 'male havens' to go to is valid. The Manosphere provides one such haven.
But even there... et voilà , these pesky women are still to be found lol.
JV,
Even as a 'not yet' mother, I can see why denying boys their freedom to be men is a bad thing. I might have daughters one day, I need your sons to be 'real men' for them. Selfish?
You bet!
Lol.
And even if I don't have daughters? Well, I would hate for my sons to give me hives...which is my reaction to extreme undiluted betadom.
And what if I don't have children at all? I would still want manly young men around that I could flirt with when I am 90 and don't care anymore about social etiquette :-)
I think Jacquie meant that she was treating her husband as if she was still his girlfriend and not his wife, and not that she was treating her husband as if he were her girlfriend. (Please corect me if I am wrong, Jacquie).
You got it right. I probably should have worded that in a better way. I also realized that stupid autocorrect or autowrite or whatever it is struck again and there is a very embarrassing typo in my post a bit further up, so I would like to correct that.
The girlfriend treatment carries over to our intimate time. I know that sex is the talk around these parts of the net and as a married old lady I hear other women complain too much about it IRL. What I’ve read over the past two years, and especially the last year on the net has helped me to realize how important it is to my husband. I have a much closer relationship with my husband now and a good part of it is driven by the renewed sex life we share. It’s one of the things I’ve been getting a bit more open in talking about and I have to wonder how many other marriages would get better if the women would understand meeting their husbands’ needs. I feel like what I’ve learned Red Pill can’t stay with me as if it’s a secret but that I need to share it and maybe wake up a few women to restart their own marriages.
@ST… “…Did you really say this to a woman, Grasshopper??...”
Yes I did. We were going through a rough stretch and arguing about I can’t remember what all the way to church one day. We get there and she was so pleasant and nice and friendly to her female friends and a complete stranger even after being a total b*tch to me in the car.
Back in the car after church when we resumed our arguing is when I said it.
In general though, I perceive women as being much less picky about the women they choose to be friends with. They seem to be much less demanding, more forgiving, more understanding, less critical with their female friends than the man in their life.
At least that is my perception and I am by no means an expert on the dynamics of female friendships.
So what struck me about Jacquie’s response was that she was less demanding, more forgiving, etc. with her husband like she was with her girlfriends, not that she goes mush city on him.
And I see by Jacquie's most recent post that I in fact did misunderstand her response.
Grasshopper
@PVW… “…but what if she works in a conservative feminist field…”
I get there are different varieties of feminism, but if she were to say to me something like…
“I really enjoyed Jane Doe’s treatise on feminism and I disagreed strongly with Mary Smith’s recent article”
If you heard this you could immediately place her on the feminist map, me I would hear enjoy and feminism in the same sentence and yellow caution flags would be raised in my mind.
I would have to fall back on my ‘what does she bring to the table’ question as to whether I deemed it worthwhile to invest the time getting up to speed enough on the topic to have reasonably intelligent conversations with her. Something I am assuming she would enjoy having with me.
My point PVW is not that I think feminists of any variety are bad people. Rather I see them as incompatible with me.
Grasshopper
@ Grasshopper,
Ah, I see what you mean. Yes it is true that some women are 'nicer' to their female friends than they are to their male partners.
I am sorry to hear of your experiences with this woman you mention.
"...me I would hear enjoy and feminism in the same sentence and yellow caution flags would be raised in my mind."
This reminds me of a little spat I had with a good male friend a few years ago about sexual harrassment. It is noteworthy that I was rather Blue Pill at the time, and din't realise that sexual harrassment could be used as a weapon against men. I really did believe that ALL cases of sexual harrassment were completely genuine.
My male friend wasn't to know about my complete lack of understanding of this subject, so of course he took offense at my unwavering defence of any woman who lodged a SH complaint without listening to the details he was giving me on specific cases he knew about. He categorised me as a 'feminazi' in his mind as a result of this, I am pretty sure, and ever since then I have been paying the price for that one :-)
It is so easy to be mis-categorised, no?
This is why I think having a good grasp of things is so important.
Now, if I hear of such cases, I want to know the facts before I make any sort of judgment. Whereas before, I would always err on the side of caution and of course take the woman's side (as society teaches one to do automatically). Now this wouldn't be a problem if all women were actually honourable in this regard. But as I am learning, sadly this is not the case. So we all have to be circumspect about this.
We shoot ourselves in the foot when we bite the hand that feeds us...
If you take advantage of a system built to protect you, it ceases to exist.
Nowadays if a woman has a genuine complaint, it risks being laughed out of court because other women have previously made a mockery of the system.
Tragic, no?
Your reaction to the word 'feminism' is similar to mine. And yet, if feminism had stopped at making life better for women, rather than going on to the monster stage where it is all about beating down men, you and I would not have such an unfortunate Pavlovian response to it.
ST:
PVW also asked me once, 'What if he gets sick or dies? How are you going to manage finacially?' And I had a non-answer for her.
:-)
PVW:
Ah yes, I remember that, and I was struck that you didn't seem to take into account the pragmatics in your ideological stance.
I remember wondering what was that all about, what explains it? How could that be? I realize now that might be part of the red pill conditioning you feel you must cultivate in today's smp.
For others, it could be that they just never saw those around them grapple with the practicalities, for whatever reason....
Grasshopper:
“I really enjoyed Jane Doe’s treatise on feminism and I disagreed strongly with Mary Smith’s recent article”
If you heard this you could immediately place her on the feminist map, me I would hear enjoy and feminism in the same sentence and yellow caution flags would be raised in my mind.
I would have to fall back on my ‘what does she bring to the table’ question as to whether I deemed it worthwhile to invest the time getting up to speed enough on the topic to have reasonably intelligent conversations with her. Something I am assuming she would enjoy having with me.
Me, PVW:
Okay, I get what you mean, and in that instance, the problem I think lies in too many academics being stuck in their academic world that they can't talk to nonacademics or even academics in different fields.
Funny, I have never expected the husband (or any of my friends) to be grounded in the feminist theories I teach and write in. But I have talked in a general fashion about my projects with him or others. I leave those questions about "Jane Doe's article, or Mary Smith's book" for my colleagues.
Yet, dating back to when were just beginning to date, he has heard me read excerpts from my work or glanced at what I was writing and saw the finished products, so he knows what I'm up to. He has always been in my acknowledgements.
But I would never expect of him the type of conversation I would have if I were writing on a feminism type topic and presenting it to a feminist theory reading group!
@ spacetraveller.
"But Bob, I also think the Manosphere is (at least an attempt at) a return to the true form of initiation/male mentoring. Men like TPM really are mentoring young men in the ways of men. Danny is probably a younger version of this 'elder' type who is helping out younger men."
A lot of these younger guys in the Manosphere can quote from memory the definitions of Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta. They can quote from memory about PUA and Game.
They cannot quote and define the Four Cardinal Virtues of:
Prudence - able to judge between actions with regard to appropriate actions at a given time.
Justice - proper moderation between self-interest and the rights and needs of others.
Temperance or Restraint - practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation.
Fortitude or Courage - forbearance, endurance, and the ability to confront fear and uncertainty, or intimidation.
These run back to Plato and became an inherent part of Christianity, although they were formulated by a pagan.
It is an impossibility for a man to live his life as a Roissy PUA/Gamer and still live his life according to the Four Cardinal Virtues.
I'll say again; all the cads I know are cowards. They also lack prudence, justice and self-control. So how can they be considered men, and why should they be models and mentors for young men?
@ Bob,
Hm, I kind of see your point. You are however tackling these issues from a philosophical/religious/moral point of view.
The others have taken the secular route.
Each to his own!
:-)
I think I see both sides here. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
ST and Bob agree that the men who congregate in the Manosphere did not have proper role models growing up and now need the substitutes that the Manosphere provides.
ST thinks that, for the crippled, any crutch at all is a good thing.
Bob thinks that a bad crutch is as as bad as no crutch at all.
@ST… “…If you take advantage of a system built to protect you, it ceases to exist…”
That is the perplexing problem isn’t it? How do we stop women gaming the system while keeping the system in place for those women that truly need it?
How do we fix the system so it treats men more fairly and justly at the same time keep it strong enough to deter the really bad ones it was set up to deter in the first place?
Grasshopper
@ Spacetraveler
"Hm, I kind of see your point. You are however tackling these issues from a philosophical/religious/moral point of view."
The Four Cardinal Virtues were first listed by Plato, long before Christianity was around.
I'm sure they noticed how bad impulsiveness is and realized people should have some self-control.
My experience with impulsive people is that they get themselves in trouble. When they're of lower intelligence they end up in prison.
The Four Cardinal Virtues are not religious. They're practical, common sense.
@ Bellita
"ST and Bob agree that the men who congregate in the Manosphere did not have proper role models growing up and now need the substitutes that the Manosphere provides.
"ST thinks that, for the crippled, any crutch at all is a good thing.
"Bob thinks that a bad crutch is as as bad as no crutch at all."
All cultures have initiated boys into manhood at the age of 12 (puberty). You can see vestiges of it in Judaism with the bar/bat mitzvah.
In the U.S. the Rites of Passage at the age of 12 consist of...entering seventh grade.
The problem with crutches is when someone is using a crutch, doesn't know it, and thinks he is healthy.
Since some women (who tend to value security above all) have tried to make the world into Nerf, boys can longer take risks (you should see my scars) so they cannot find out what they are capable. They can't learn to be brave, for one thing, by facing their fears - which they usually find out isn't much to be afraid of, anyway.
Bellita,
"I think I see both sides here. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)"
From my end, you are spot on Bell!
Thanks for the nice summary. I really couldn't work out why Bob and I couldn't reach a suitable conclusion to our discussion.
@ Grasshopper,
"How do we stop women gaming the system while keeping the system in place for those women that truly need it?
How do we fix the system so it treats men more fairly and justly at the same time keep it strong enough to deter the really bad ones it was set up to deter in the first place?"
I think Bob just provided the answers, courtesy of Plato :-)
Individual responsibility, as outlined in The Four Cardinal Virtues!
@ Bob,
"The problem with crutches is when someone is using a crutch, doesn't know it, and thinks he is healthy."
Hahaha, Bob, I never thought of this before, but now I can see that this could be a serious limitation of The Manosphere...
Great insight.
Post a Comment