Red Pill ideology isn’t just hateful and misogynistic; it’s also a remarkably bleak way to look at the world, even for the men who supposedly benefit the most from taking “the red pill” — that is, the allegedly smooth players who boast about bedding so many women on “game” blogs.
Take, for example, what you might call the “spoiled milk” theory of marriage that’s sometimes trotted out on these blogs.
Since women reach their prime young, the theory goes, then rapidly lose their looks and their value after “hitting the wall” at the age or 25 or 30, it only makes sense to marry a woman when she’s young — so you get to have sex with her before she gets all old and hideous.
If you marry her later, this means that someone else has had her at her best — and you haven’t!
As the blogger at LaidNYC argues in a post titled “Don’t Marry Any Woman Older Than 25,”
If you meet your wife when she’s older than around 23 or 24:
You are eating someone else’s cold leftovers, then doing their dishes.
You are showing up to a party after everyone has left and cleaning up after them.
You are getting into a taxi and paying the fare of the person who got out before you.
You are taking the nearly expired milk to the grocery store counter and offering to pay double for it.
He goes on in this fashion for some time.
You are paying for someone’s credit card bill full of reckless spending and partying that you never got to enjoy. …
You are trying to unclog somebody else’s clogged toilet.
Ok, now that last one didn’t even make sense.
Anyway, after running out of metaphors, LaidNYC gets to his point:
A girl who refuses to get married young is offering a raw deal. She is vastly overvaluing her product, and undervaluing your time and money.
Marriage only makes sense for a man when a girl’s prime years of beauty and fertility are upfront payment for a lifetime of loving masculine support.
LaidNYC goes on to suggest that women who are too picky when they’re young will end up regretting it later:
Is it any wonder, then, that as females are delaying marriage longer, they are finding less willing men?
Youthful arrogance is the yellow brick road to spinsterhood.
But I want to go back to that previous bit:
Marriage only makes sense for a man when a girl’s prime years of beauty and fertility are upfront payment for a lifetime of loving masculine support.
Can you imagine a more depressing way to look at marriage? If you’re so twisted by your misogyny that you can’t see value in your wife after she hits the age of 30 or so, and stick with her only out of a sense of obligation because she fucked you when she was 25, well, dude, you deserve to be miserable. And I can only hope your wife leaves you for someone who can appreciate her in the here and now.
Misogynistic assholes are at least as good at making themselves miserable as they are at making things shitty for other people.
Interesting that LaidinNYC’s metaphors all have to do with a woman being “used” or “damaged” once she’s dated another man. Which, if her prior relationship was with a gaslighting PUA, I could see there might be an awful lot of psychological cleanup to do.
And then, I love how they assume they’ll still have unfettered access to 18 year olds when they’re 40. Aside from the fact that wrinkles and gravity and thinning hair affect men too, aside from the fact that men also have peak fertility and a biological clock, there is the fact that several additional years of bitterness, misogyny, entitlement, and furious basement blog posting don’t add up to enchanting vintage nectar for the ladeez. These are not people who get better with age.
The whole fertility thing is just confusing. Most women are capable of getting pregnant into their late 30s and even early 40s. Heck, I gave birth at 44. *checks sole of foot for expiration date*
On a side note, I’d like to zap Todd Aiken, Rush Limbaugh, Ted Nugent, and whatsisname from the Westboro Baptist Church with the values laser. And Sarah Palin. Also too.
“Gad, Argenti, you’ve given fish fingers an entirely new meaning!”
I don’t think they’d go for custard though!
And I second pecunium’s “start with Obama” motion. And then my fucking father since I have to fucking listen to him. Then we can move back to politics.
Pecunium…Yudkowsky.
This one may ruffle feathers, but here me out…the pope. Just enough for him to dictate that abortion is completely moral if the mother’s life or health is, or may become, in danger. Don’t want to completely upset the entire Catholic Church, but this excommunicating nuns for saving women’s lives shit has got to stop.
And Obama needs to grow a spine, make good on closing Gitmo and stop trying for bipartisan solutions with the “oppose Obama” party.
Yudkowsky…giving him all your money is the best thing you can do for the future of the human species so he can develop friendly AI. Which is just the tip of the fucked up cult-y iceberg. And no one here wants to hear what either pecunium or I have to say beyond that!
Seriously Argenti, seriously?
Hear me out, not here me out. Dafuq?
@sarahliz – Emma Thompson was the reason I watched that film all the way through! Depressing as hell otherwise. Loved her in Sense and Sensibility and Dead Again, though the cigarettes thing in Stranger than Fiction was skin-crawling, lol.
@LBT – I can understand Mac being bothered by the aging. I’m older than Louis in earth years – he was only 41 – and the idea of becoming old while he stays the same was pretty depressing. That’s why he’s chosen to match speeds.
Which just shows they have better taste than the Doctor! (At least, in that combination. Custard I like. Custard Danish, yum.)
FTR, they don’t really eat my fingers, I can’t really feel it and it feels more like them bumping into me than biting. Almost like…just barely press a nail into another finger, it’s like that. Hich means I’m just fine with them nibbling on me, particularly my nails, since puffers are like rodents — they need to grind down their continuously growing teeth (they have four, two on top and two on bottom, but they merge into each other and are called a beak…yeah idk how fish got beaks)
RE: Kittehserf
@LBT – I can understand Mac being bothered by the aging. I’m older than Louis in earth years – he was only 41 – and the idea of becoming old while he stays the same was pretty depressing. That’s why he’s chosen to match speeds.
Yeah. Mac tends to get weirdly cradle-robbing with just about every birthday. I think the worst of it was when he turned thirty and I was still just twenty-one. He seemed to have this fear that he’d taken away my young and crazy years. He didn’t seem to realize that there wasn’t anyone else I would’ve wanted to USE them on! As I grow older, he seems to mellow out a bit though.
Werewolf?
There, wolf. There, castle.
Oh, Argenti, Sneak wants to know how big those puffers can get.
LBT – Louis and I have it going both ways. Am I the cougar (I’d rather be a leopard, but whatevs) with me 50 and him 41, or is he the ultimate cradle snatcher at 411? 😉
*laughs* Yeah. I’m kind of amused that Mac would even be bothered. I mean, I’m not exactly the partying, experimental type. What would I even USE my wild years for? Playing competitive bridge? I’m not like him; I never had an interest in sleeping my way through a bar.
LOL I don’t think I even had wild years. Mild years, perhaps, but definitely not wild ones, unless you count what happened to my perm when I combed it.
Okay, it’s been a long comment thread and hell if I’m going to go back and reread it all, but let me see if I can summarize whats-his-name keysmash dude for anyone who might be joining late. (My comments are in parentheses.)
•The original post isn’t bad because younger women are hotter than older women.
•The original post/PUAs in general cannot be ‘objectifying’ women because that would mean seeing them as an object like a credit card. PUAs want to have sex with women and do not want to have sex with credit cards; QED PUAs are not objectifying women. (No, seriously. Remember this argument.)
•Anyway, objectification isn’t bad because humans don’t have intrinsic value? Something something worth is purely determined by the observer, blah blah if you value humanity you are unable to value the traits of individual people, la la la la ontological materialism. (Yeah…I have never studied philosophy and frankly got lost at this point.)
•Even if humanity had intrinsic value, it doesn’t stop crimes against people and their humanity so it’s not real value. (???)
•However, despite lack of intrinsic value, since humans do not want to die it is bad to kill them. But that doesn’t mean their lives are actually worth anything!
•Communism and humanism are closely related. (I have no idea where this came from or how it related to anything else he was ‘arguing’, but there you go.)
•Objectification is to have “emotional dispositions” towards a person or object. (What?) Or *maybe* it means to consider a person only as a means to an end but that isn’t important because remember, women=/=credit cards and therefore objectification cannot be happening. (So basically, this troll understands neither the actual dictionary definition of the word ‘objectification’, nor the cultural and colloquial way it’s being used in this discussion. In case you had any doubts.)
•Objectification is morally neutral because when a surgeon performs surgery, he/she is objectifying the patient. (Why did we abruptly go from ‘objectification is definitely not a thing’ to ‘objectification is something everyone does to everybody’? Who knows?)
•If you are rude and objectify a waiter, that is actually good because it means that you are not intruding on the waiter’s personal life with questions, which would be much worse than objectification. This is the same reason that psychotherapists are silent when meeting with their patients, to avoid ‘crossing boundaries’. (Why this is a good thing since humanity is objectively valueless in the commenter’s estimation, is anyone’s guess.)
•When you pay a person for services, such as wait-staff, that is also objectification. (…)
•We are rude and hypocritical for calling him a troll. Also, we do not understand the difference between logical and moral categories. (…)
•Objectification is bad if the person being objectified doesn’t want to be objectified. If they are okay with it, it’s okay. (Again, suddenly objectification is a thing. Have women TURNED INTO credit cards? Or have PUAs gained a fetish for credit cards en masse? I am so confused)
•If I love and desire my significant other, they are now objectified because they are the ‘objects’ of my love and desire. (…wait, is he confusing philosphy and linguistics? Is he literally thinking that ‘object of the sentence’ = ‘objectified’?)
•David, though commenting precisely 0 times so far in this discussion, is forcing his (David’s) values on our commenter. Specifically, forcing him to value intelligence and personality in women rather than just looks. This offends our commenter’s atheist sensibilities. (I don’t even.)
•”Bottom line: Objectification is a sketchy concept.” (…) (…) (error error does not compute)
Amatyultare – OMG I’ve just realised: boring troll was Son of NWOslave, who hasn’t yet reached Frothing Rage level. Your summary’s brilliant, it was like reading The Second Big Book of Learnin’.
“Oh, Argenti, Sneak wants to know how big those puffers can get.”
Here you go Sneak! ~3″ and I’ve seen 15g plus 10g for each additional puffer way more than I’ve seen 30g (which I’m not going to fault live aquaria for, I’d much rather they tell new fish owners the high end so when people inevitably cut corners the fishies are still happy)
“This offends our commenter’s atheist sensibilities.”
Our commentator seemed to confuse atheism with his personal value system.
Dawwww! Sneak thinks they’re adorable. Zie also asks if they puff up real big like the ones zie’s seen elsewhere.
RE: sarahlizhousespouse
Our commentator seemed to confuse atheism with his personal value system.
Atheists like that make me want to convert and worship the Golem of Prague.
…and I buggered the italics. Damn.
“…and I buggered the italics. Damn.”
That’s cos it should have been the Golem Possum of Prague, who sees everything.
… but how can our commenter have values, when they are but a human being, and inherently worthless? Why bother? Wotsitallabout?
I wonder if this kid got thrown out by the Emos for being a nitwit.
I think Energomash gave me a stroke from stupid. As an atheist I don’t like this.
::fans baileyrenee::
Phew…. II think I’ll be okay kittehserf… I need some cute animal videos…
Puppies, stat!
http://youtu.be/sMpcqBZHZNA