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.
Two DavidsCat and ferret!http://youtu.be/ksjEBJA7Iwg
@Kitteserf: I don’t own any puppies, let alone puppies as heartmeltingly adorable as the ones in that video.
And as an atheist, I don’t like this.
Eeeeee, so tiny!
And that ferret is an adorable little jerk.
I had no idea rotti pups were so fuzzy … THE CUTE IT IS TOO MUCH
http://youtu.be/BL608WmNORc
I found a good one on TheTruePooka’s channel! As an atheist I like this!
Best friends Maia the miniature dachshund and Fignuts the cat wrestling:
http://youtu.be/N8b5GxLtqQ8
Tiny baby kittieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees!
There is a solution.
So much fur!! Will get back to it!
Sneak — idk about saltwater puffs, but for freshwater and brackish ones (afaik) puffing up isn’t good for them, they can’t breathe like that. So no clue how big they get. Given how stretched out they get when they gorge themselves before I can get the extra out, they probably go from the size of a pea to the size of a small grape. Most puffs seems to puff to their body length turned into a ball, if that makes sense.
katz – ROFL!
The doctor decided to see to the person complaining about cramps before zie would see me about my broken ribs. As the achy-ist, I don’t like this.
::splork::
I’ll be invoicing you for the monitor cleaning, Amnesia.
I find Amnesia’s complaint to be entirely valid. Unlike the latest “philosopher”‘s complaints.
You guys. I need a serious opinion…
It is my birthday soon, and rather than him spend lots of money, I’ve suggested my boyfriend learn to make choux pastry so we can make and devour a croque en bouche as my birthday cake. Partly because they are omg good, and partly because he loves profiteroles but has never tried croque en bouche.
Is this misandry because:
a) I am over 25
b) I am obviously lying and will get upset when he doesn’t buy me expensive jewelry
c) I am vilifying his masculinity by making him go into the kitchen
d) all of the above
Umm I doubt this guy is offering anyone “loving support” with that mentality.
And now I feel sad because I’m 23 and therefore too old to date…….You know cause I only have 2 good years left. And then…..well…….marrying me would be pointless.
So I’ve been with my bf since age 22. I’m almost 28. If he married me now, would that count since he already “got my best years” or should he run while he still can and marry some 18 year old? Oh wait, neither of us want to marry anyone…. how does that fit into this theory??
Since the troll decided to use ice cream as a metaphor for women’s bodies, it totally gives me an excuse to post these two music videos that demonstrate the difference between sexual content that’s objectifying and sexual content that frames women as subjects rather than objects! The lyrics aren’t in English, so feel free to turn the sound off (also the first song is terrible, like Katy Perry terrible). These two videos came out at around the same time, so I’m not the first to use them to illustrate the difference (don’t want to steal other people’s work – both Korean feminists and a few Western feminists who like K-pop have already done the intellectual heavy lifting here). Both videos are probably NSFW, the second one especially.
This right here? Is objectification. Which is why when it came out all the feminists referred to above rolled their eyes in disdain.
This video otoh is just as sexual, if not more so, but focused on the woman as sexual subject rather than sexual object (yes, she really is sitting around in her kitchen masturbating at one point). Every Korean feminist I know was cheering when they saw this one.
Tl;DR sexuality is not objectification. Objectification is when you remove a person’s subjectivity and make their sexuality all about what it can offer to other people. Ironically, framing women as subjects rather than objects often ends up creating stuff that’s much more erotic (which is why the censors went apeshit over the second video and not the first one – there’s nothing that pisses off a censorship board like women having an orgasm).
Energomash said:
“If my girlfriend agrees to be my object of love and desire, there is no problem with objectifying her. The problem arises if that woman does not want to be my girlfriend or object of desire.”
Your girlfriend is supposed to be someone you love, accept and respect, at least after thirty years of marriage that’s my experience of sexual/romantic/friendship relationships. The things I mentioned preclude objectification. If you’re incapable of giving her those things. she should head for the nearest available exit. You’re looking for excuses to objectify her and not really giving a damn about her as a human being. Either you’re being mindbogglingly dishonest or you’re playing the kind of word games that I wouldn’t tolerate in my ten year old nephew.
I think our new troll is suffering from a tragic combination of low intelligence, Dunning Kruger syndrome, exposure to baby’s first philosophy text, and a few ESL problems.
Energomash said *sigh*:
“Objectification is not always ‘bad’. For example Surgeons have to treat their patients like objects, or else they couldn’t do their work.
Also, if you treat the waiter (non empathic) like an object he can hide behind his role, which saves him for example from nosy questions about his private life.”
1. In order to do the surgical part of his/her job he/shemay need to be able to put emotional distance between him/her and his/her patient but he/she had damn well better be treating him/her as a human being before and after the procedure or his/her patient won’t trust him/her. Trust is a vast part of that relationship. I’ve been treated like a slab of meat while conscious by a surgeon during the last two years while being treated for cancer I withdrew my consent and they had to find me a new, trustworthy surgeon. Fast. Had he continued I would have sued him for malpractice. I still find the incident traumatic to think about.
2. No you are treating them as a professional. That is an act of respect. They deserve “please” and “thank you”, good manners, a pleasant demeanor and in some places a substantial tip. Answering nosy questions from bad mannered customers is not part of their job, nor is being hit on, bullied or otherwise demeaned and customers who do it deserve to be ejected.
I’m not sure you even understand what the term means.
There’s also the fact that people with no social skills often don’t understand how easy it is for many of us to, say, interact with wait staff in a way that acknowledges them as people without crossing their boundaries. Just because you can’t do it doesn’t mean that it can’t be done, dude.
Kim – it’s d. Definitely d.
Happy birthday in advance, btw!
On the waiter nonsense from nitwit troll: I had to laugh about the “never talking about personal stuff because it’s intrusive/never show you have emotions, ditto” theme because it assumes wait staff are forever strangers and one can never get on friendly chat terms. Four years of going to the same cafe every morning and I, and plenty of other regulars, knew about the owner/waiter’s cats, health, what he did on the weekend, what strange things happened during the day, what films he was watching … and he knew the same things about us. He was also my resident expert on “Well of course Louis would say that, he’s French!”
Damn I wish that place hadn’t closed! 🙁
Of course it’s quite possible that trolly mctrollerson has never been to a cafe/restaurant twice because they ban him after one visit.
Oh, and that knowledge didn’t come from intrusive, nosy questions: it came from easy small talk and general conversation – but relating to Cassandra’s point, I suspect trollyboy knows jack shit about those, too.