On a somewhat lighter note than my last post, here is a lesson in, er, economics from the Red Pill subreddit.
Yeah, I’m not sure that “logical” is the word you’re looking for there, champ.
If this screenshot is blurry — someone told me they were having problems with this — here’s the text:
thebears1986 67 points 1 year ago
Women used to maintain a pussy cartel. To get any pussy you had to get married. Men want pussy so they got married. The cartel broke down a bit and women started giving access to pussy after engagement. Then the effort was lowered some more and the couple only had to be “going steady”. Next was “in a committed relationship” and eventually the “3 date rule”. Today you just swipe right on a smartphone.
Women currently sell into a hyper-competitive sex market where once they were buyers with a huge upper hand. The market is flooded and prices have dropped to $0.00. Gone are the days where they could demand any sort of commitment in exchange for access. Women still want men so they provide extra services to the men to compete for attention. Naked pics are extra services they use to keep up with the many women competing for the man they want. Either they send the pics or the guy moves on to the women who will.
I think the next major innovation will be women grouping together to offer threesomes to men in exchange for attention. Once naked pics become normalized they will have to do something. This is the next logical step.
H/T — I think someone on the Blue Pill subreddit linked to this recently; I can’t find the post
@Buttercup
Those guys should *really* get away from porn and Tinder; being constantly on those would very quickly warp one’s perspective.
Seriously, they need to get off the Internet for at least a couple months (or years), so they can go into healthy relationships. Also, they need to go in the great outdoors for a while. Camping and hiking and sometimes-enjoying nature (darn you, mosquito bites!) really puts your everyday life in perspective, believe me. 😉
@Paradoxical
I can’t think of a word. What about: cishet-white syndrome?
There isn’t a word for it because they assume “reality” is the word, and I think we’ve already tried with delusional paranoiac.
@amandajane
Well, there is a specific name for that bias/logical fallacy. It’s on the tip of my tongue. Eergh, I don’t want to “cheat” and look it up on the omniscient interwebs; it will come to me eventually. XD
But yeah, the MRWimps have that bias/fallacy big time.
@ epsilon
See above 🙂
😀
Thanks for the laugh! Ah, I love this community. 🙂
This community stays quite positive despite the awful content the MRWimps often puts out. 😉
Hmm, I wouldn’t consider it false consensus effect, more, like, they have a very specific view of how things work and how people act based on their own experiences. It has nothing about how they believe things should be as what they think things were like.
Like, they listened to old, white men wax poetic about the good ol’ days too much or something and that’s how they thought people actually acted, ya know? I think we discuss this before and described it as “false nostalgia”, but it’s more like having a 6th grade understanding of history and thinking that’s 100% accurate and correct.
So how exactly does someone beat one of these MRWimps anyway?
Do I tell these guys that they don’t represent me because I don’t believe I’m entitled to sex and a relationship? Likewise, that I think that most “gender norms” are actually quite stupid and pointless, thus they also don’t represent me in that regard?
Because I have to put up with some sexist a-holes in the art school I go to, and I need to figure how to stand up to them at some point…
@FNDA
When they assert something, like “women shouldn’t be in the medical profession”, get them to explain exactly why they think that. Then, beat them up with logic. 🙂
It’s a good idea to get reaquainted with neurological science, how to read a study and study flaws, because at some point they’ll bring up that “men are smarter and better at math than women”, which is patently not true.
It’s super important to stay very calm during an argument. It’s much easier to do so when armed with the facts.
What specifically crops up that’s bothering you at your school? The double standard of promiscuity and sexual expectations, or something else?
I just had a thought about the “history” of marriage. It’s worth looking at marriages of the majority of people of past societies rather than limiting ourselves to the very small groups of aristocrats and land-owners. It’s not just the witless maunderings of thebears1986 and his ilk, a lot of people with a conventional history education tend to have too concentrated a focus on propertied classes.
The easiest read on the topic would be The Subversive Family: An Alternative History of Love and Marriage by Ferdinand Mount. His very conservative politics show through at various times. But his emphasis on digging through archives of weird and wonderful legal proceedings affecting ordinary people makes it an interesting read.
People who favour xtianity should skip Chapter 1 and come back to it after reading other parts, especially the introduction. He’s obviously extremely disappointed by his research showing that, unlike his previously rose-tinted view of the role of the church, the church was not supportive or helpful At All when it came to families, women, children. And it shows. (It’s a bit like a recent convert to not smoking or not drinking. Everything about the former favourite is abhorrent, vile and disgusting.) He’s positively vitriolic when criticising the church.
@mildlymagnificent
Correct. Every single (corrupt) organization that wanted power and absolute authority wanted to isolate individuals, specifically break up and get away from the family, and prevent a new one if possible. It’s the same tactic that dictators have used before and during their reign, and religion is no exception. One doesn’t need to look at much farther than, say, the Catholic Church, centuries ago and more recently. Also, the more recent cults that sprang up are smaller but pertinent examples.
Part of the reason why some of these movements, like the MRAs and TRP forums, is that they contain some amount if truth, which can make it difficult to distinguish from the lies or things that don’t mach up with reality. Doubly difficult if it’s mostly a dissenting philosophy, because criticism is often viewed as more credible than an opinion that’s mostly or wholly positive.
To be clear, I’m not banging on religion as a whole or anyone’s specific religion, here; it’s just that it’s easy to abuse authority. Because power corrupts and all that.
@Friendly Neighbourhood Dragon Arthur:
I read your post as meaning that you identify (and present) as male. If that’s not the case, please tell me.
I’ve found that the best way to do it is to let them see that you find them absurd. MRAs are extraordinarily sensitive to not being taken seriously, and simply showing them that you think their philosophy is unworthy of being taken seriously is far more powerful than any amount of patient counterarguments. Don’t allow them to frame the debate as being between equal and opposite sides (MRAs vs Feminists) but instead treat them as the equivalent of flat earthers.
Never be afraid to simply laugh and walk away. That annoys them more than you can possibly know.
It helps if you come across as someone they would consider high-status within the MRA cult of what it means to be a man, because then your disapproval can’t easily be shrugged off. Fortunately most of this status can be gained as the side effects of being a decent human being.
Simply being content in your own skin, being happy with your relationship status, and enjoying doing things you’re good at is inherently a threat to them because one of the underlying beliefs of MRAdom is that men shouldn’t be happy with the world as it stands.
@Epsilon
I’m fascinated. Do you have any theories about why this many people (at least four and possibly six) would have such consistently nonsexist standards when it came to sex? (Was it your culture? A cad in the family tree? Maybe a couple of really strong grandmothers? Religion?)
Inquiring minds need to know. That is, if you want to share.
@magnesium
Yeah, that’s probably been the experience of Red Pillers the time or two they had sex.
And naturally they’re not going to try to become more sexually skilled, more charming, or more loving. Or a better listener. Or the guy who surprises his date with flowers. Or notices that her eyes are a really pretty shade of green. Nah. Instead, they’ll sit in front of their computer screens and shout “!!!Whores!!!”
Yes. They’re aware they’re being petty and hateful and deliberately constructing their worldview to be as cynical as possible. Also they’re aware they’re making shit up. They’re engaged in this competition of one-upmanship, to see who can put the worst spin on things. And to justify this, they claim all men are like them and that it’s not possible for them to be better. It’s “natural” to be completely selfish.
This awareness may not be fully conscious, but they reveal it subtly all the time.
I always appreciate any enlightened discussion of spinsters.
My father was a truly toxic individual. Once, at a gathering of the extended family, he mocked my mother for “almost ending up a spinster.” I felt obliged to stand up for my mother but knew I had to be extremely crafty in order to avoid his wrath coming down on both of us. (Yes! I am a female white knight! I take my sacred vows of white knighthood very seriously.)
Drawing upon my reading of feminist scholars, I casually remarked to my mother in full hearing of everyone present, “Did you know that the word ‘spinster’ has an interesting history? It means ‘a woman who spins'”–thereby composting my father’s poison. The attention in the room shifted from my mother’s alleged deficiency to a consideration of a word and its origins.
The horrifying thing is, I’ve associated with a lot of unsavory un-feminist (atheist, libertarian, startup douche, scifi fan, stem dude, metalhead, brogrammer, neoreactionary, you name it) types in my life, and this is what they say. I was a “cool girl” (I’m not a girl) and I “got it” so they told me quite openly and proudly about cynically pretending to be feminist to all women they became involved with. They wish they didn’t need to, and they will drop the act the minute they think
Fortunately most aren’t very good at it, but the majority of women and woman-shaped beings, especially the young ones, aren’t that enlightened about feminism, and have been trained all their lives to ignore the warning signs instead of paying careful attention to them.
I’m sure you’ve heard someone claim men talk a certain way when there are no women around. Well, it’s true of many of them. Who seem quite normal, decent and even sensitive. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve told a trusted and otherwise decent male friend his friend is a vile and hostile sexist and got a reaction of incredulity, excusing and confusion, I’d be almost a dollar hundredaire.
For reasons mentioned above, I do believe expecting to find a non-sexist man may lead you to be disappointed. There aren’t that many to go around, and most of what glitters is not gold at all.
But this isn’t to say that you shouldn’t be that picky. Like someone already said, those are minimum requirements.
They talk about male SMV a lot. Mostly to gloat about how, supposedly, men age like fine wine compared to those wall-hitting females.
They believe women have herd mentality, and they all want the same men because men are high status if all women want them. So having sex with many partners makes a man desirable in their bizarro universe.
Nevermind that if you ask women they say the opposite. Women are children and they don’t know what they want, amirite? They always say what they think will make them look good.
In. His. Dreams.
@ Petrovna
They share nudes women have sent them or let them take (sometimes money is involved) on imageboards. They get posted and reposted and re-reposted. Of course there’s a massive selection effect, but if you keep seeing dozens or hundreds every day, and you’re a simple-minded misogynist, naturally you’re going to think it happens all the time.
And from what I gather it does actually seem to be common for younger people to send nudes. Teenage girls do often think they have to give in to men’s demands to keep their attention, and haven’t learned about the concept of enthusiastic consent yet. There’s this persistent trope, that women have to bribe men with sex into giving them a relationship, that relationships are a constant negotiation over what sex acts women owe men for the attention and affection they’ve received, and that this is normal and healthy. So on top of those teenage girls who do it because they want to, there are plenty who do it because they think they have to.
@ Epsilon
I don’t think this is a good idea. It would be ideal if everyone could get a second or nth chance, but in this case it would involve an innocent person bearing the risk of these guys regressing or only having faked their rehabilitation. It’s not my place to say people aren’t allowed to take a chance on whoever they want, but encouraging them to do so? Even worse, encouraging misogynists to change by dangling the reward of a relationship with a woman in front of them? Just, no.
OT but I loved Huckabee’s first answer in the undercard debate last night. The question was, 8 years ago he won the Iowa caucus and now he’s way behind, so why is the message not working this time?
His answer (almost exact quote): “It’s not that the message isn’t working, it’s just not getting out. I’m saying the same exact things now as I did 8 years ago!”
I think I see the problem!!! :p
Huckabee’s real problem is that, in the past 8 years, his image has gone from “Influential christian who actually cares for the poor” to “Unrepenting pedophilia apologist”. Not a whole lot of people are going to listen to his message regardless of what it is. The Republican Right as a whole isn’t really very much like the manospherians, even if they share some beliefs in common.
Well, okay, the culture has changed a little since then and that probably has an effect too. But I suspect that, under the circumstances, an unchanged culture wouldn’t really help anyway.
@Epsilon
Women can win–by not playing by their rules.
I know that you already knew that. But I just had to say it.
@ dragon
Others have already provided brilliant advice. Do you have to engage them though? I’m reminded of the quote “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get covered in shit but the pig enjoys it”
If of course they’re actively making your life intolerable then the strategies outlined previously are a good bet.
I love Red Pillers’ predictions.
But I need a timeline.
Seriously, Red Piller, how can I take you seriously if you don’t provide me with a date? “I think” and “The next logical step” is so vague, so…beta.
If I’m going to be able to verify your awesome psychic prediction, I’m going to need something solid: the year, month, and day when women will be obliged to start offering threesomes to get any male attention.
Hey, thanks!