This may be the Red Pilliest quote ever! Here’s the full quote in all of its uncensored glory, straight from the Red Pill subreddit.
And here is a picture of one big, sad beta orbiter and the bitch he adores.
EAT THE RED KIBBLE!
Thanks to the Blue Pill subreddit for finding this bit of Red Pill goodness.
Speaking of which, some folks in the Blue Pill subreddit are tentatively planning some meetups. If you want to join them, check out this topic right here.
Right. ‘Cos when straight women turn down straight guys, they’re NEVER called lesbians.
This is what I think of whenever Good is here:
Or bitches, sluts, or any other derogatory term the entitled douchebag can come up with. Nope, that NEVER happens.
It’s a shame that some (all?) women can be such jerks, when men are always perfect gentlemen.
Note that Good fails to understand the difference between a rejected individual lashing out verbally at the rejecter (not nice, but a pretty common human reaction from both genders) and the subsequent decision to create a lump rule about all members of the same demographic as the original rejecter. (All women, or in more limited cases all Western/[specific ethnicity]/[specific religious affiliation]/[specific economic class] women.)
The latter is, of course, when you move on from reasonable, if unfortunate, personal butthurt to the sort of broader bigotry that this site is dedicated to mocking.
Good bores me all the way back to Monday.
The manosphere: the only place on Earth where having friends is considered failure.
The only upside to living in Manosphereworld that I can see is that chocolate won’t taste of incipient diabetes and is, in fact, the breakfast of champions.
For what it’s worth, I’ll throw in my two cents:
Good: I think what people are trying to say here is that the idea that a woman owes a man sexual favors for doing something nice is, well, wrong. Nobody “owes” anybody sex, for anything; and if said woman turns down said man, she is some kind of manipulative bitch. Further, the idea that man who does nice things for a woman and does not get sex from her in return is an “orbiter,” which I take to be some kind of derogatory term. Because, of course, a man always wants sex in return for whatever, and cannot just be doing something because he is a good friend or a decent human being or anything.
And yes, everything freemage said. People can be jerks, regardless of sex or gender.
Mammoth receipts: hah! I lolled.
…see, this is a false equivalence.
Why?
Well, on the one hand the MRAs literally say that if a woman isn’t having sex with a guy who has given her things she is defrauding them, and is terrible. And there are vague threats of violence behind it.
But oh noes, some women, when turned down, might be angry!!
…anger. Versus threats of violence, actual violence, and rape.
There’s your equivalence, Good. Those are the things you treat as equally worth consideration.
There is no ‘fuck you’ large enough.
Woman with literal orbiter: The alien movie-maker Bereet from the Marvel Universe. Check out the pic at the left of the page, and you can see the small, round little robot-creature that circles around her and does her every bidding. And I bet she never had sex with it. http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4/bereet_krylor.htm
The language and tone of the quote is horrible, but if you replace “sexually attracted to a [woman]” with “see a woman as more than friend, but are too afraid to ask her out” then I think the quote is pretty accurate.
An orbiter is a guy who is pursuing a woman, but instead of directly asking the girl out, the orbiter tries to use acts of kindness as a way to get into her pants.
Thank you for splaining that, Walter, and for assuming that we’re too dumb to have translated the original quote from asshole into more polite asshole for ourselves.
Walter, that’s the NiceGuy(TM) who thinks kindness coins mean the sex vending machine should be paying out. I get the impression these cretins think any man who’s friends with a woman he’s attracted to is an “orbiter”. Y’know, because of course her preferences don’t come into it, and no Real Man would want something like friendship with a mere woman.
And if he’s an actual nice guy and realizes asking her out would just make things weird, when he values their friendship, well then he’s an orbiter. Which last I checked was an insult, something you didn’t want to be.
So putting your friendship with a woman over your boner is a bad thing.
You guys really are some sad lonely people huh? (Someone get Buzz Lightyear please?)
Do you feel better now that you’ve splained that, Walter? Anything else you need to share?
Someone called for Buzz Lightyear?
Since we were talking about early rock group loves the other day, I’ll just say that if Kiss had looked like this I could have totally been a fan.
Kiss are the perfect example of a band who really should have kept the makeup on.
That is soooo true.
You all are a touchy bunch, aren’t you?
If the quote had used the term,”nice guy” instead of “orbiter” would you have had such an issue with it? Because all the quote did was outline the standard MO of a “nice guy.”
Now, does this guy dislike orbiters/nice guys for different reasons than you or I? Most definitely. does he probably consider platonic relationships with women as bad? More likely than not. Is he an idiot for disliking platonic male/female relationships? Yes, definitely. But his reasons for disliking nice guys or his disdain for women don’t change the accuracy of the quote.
That quote described a man who is pretending to be a woman’s friend in order to get sex. That is a text book orbiter/nice guy. The quote is factually correct.
Actually, we’re making fun of you. It appears to me that you are the touchy one, toots. And seriously, this post was clearly an excuse to share an adorable dog picture, so you lose.
Walter – where does the creepster say that the “orbiter” is trying/failing to get sex? Where does he say anything to suggest he knows that people can be friends, can be sexually attracted, not pursue it and be content with the situation because they LIKE each other and can’t/won’t change the situation? All he says is that a man doing anything for a woman he’s attracted to, and not getting (forcing?) sex as a reward, is a loser. Which is true enough of NiceGuys(TM) but it’s not the “not fucking” that makes them losers, it’s being manipulative, entitled, predatory scumbags.
Where does this jackass say anything to suggest men and women can be friends?
And if you’re going to talk about the NiceGuy(TM), you need to write the term properly. The whole point is that they’re not nice guys at all.
Just because the above quote is an accurate description of the concept of an “orbiter” doesn’t make the quote, or the concept, any less stupid.
Sorry, Walter, I don’t believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny either.