Fellas! Do you have any female friends? Do you hang out with them without having sex?
Well, apparently you’re doing it all wrong, at least according to the world-class relationship expert and Red Pill Redditor Throwaway244555. In a recent post on the Red Pill subreddit, he explained the fundamental rule of male-female friendships, which is that there should be no male-female friendships.
Woman are friends with woman, and they have sex with men. So if you’re her friend, you’re a vagina.
Remember, fellas, women are for sex, so if one of them wants to Netflix and chill without the chill part, tell her she’ll have to Netflix alone. By the way, “chill” in this context means sex. Like coffee, Netflix and chill means sex. And may not involve Netflix at all.
You ask this girl to be your gf, she rejects you but ask if we can still be friends. That’s a insult, she thinks less of you.
If a woman likes you, Mr. Throwaway244555 contends, she will let you put your penis in her. If she says she likes you yet is not interested in your penis she is insulting you to your very core. And if you actually do become friends with her, you are failing so utterly as a man that you might as well be a vagina.
A male and female aren’t suppose to be friends, they’re suppose to be love intrest. So basically you’re a vagina, because girls are suppose to be friends with girls, and fuck men. Also girls are horrible friends, all they do is leech off you, and cause drama.
So when a girl rejects you, and puts you in the friendzone, it’s a insult. Next time she says let’s just be friends, say no thank you.
DO NOT LET HER ROPE YOU IN WITH HER TALK OF “FRIENDSHIP.”
Or, I dunno, you could just go ahead and be friends with her, and look elsewhere for sex and/or romance?
I mean, sure, if you’re in love with a woman who isn’t in love with you, you’ll probably do the both of you a favor if you move on instead of taking her friendship as a “consolation prize,” which is really a shitty thing to consider a friendship to be.
Or if you decide to become “friends” with a woman because you hope to eventually manipulate her into having sex with you, well, that’s pretty shitty too. So stop it, and move on.
All this applies as well with the genders reversed, and in same-sex couples, and indeed in any gender variation possible.
But Jesus H. Christ, dudes, you can be friends with a woman if you want to. You can be friends with her if you don’t want to have sex with her. And you can be friends with her even if you sorta do.
I mean, seriously, dudes, you know that gay men are friends with other gay men that they never actually have sex with, right?
That said, if you’re a Red Pill dude, I would strongly suggest you not become friends with any women at all until you cease to be a Red Pill dude.
I skipped most of Chandler’s tl;dr, but I’m assuming he’s Reg.
Aggh! I forgot about this! That would have been the perfect caption for the pic, which is (as far as I can tell) supposed to show a dog jealous that his or her human has a girlfriend.
Chandler, it seems as though you enjoyed writing that, at least from the small portion of it that I read, but I’m pretty sure no one here is going to read the whole thing.
@ Chandler
Wut? Use smaller words, please.
I read Chandler’s comment but all I processed was intellectual wanking. @Chandler, the issue I take with what I gleaned from that magnificent piece of pseudointellectual thesaurus abuse is that you seem, like the post quoted above, to be of the opinion that women aren’t interested in sex and men aren’t interested in friendship. Even if you buy that all areas of human relationships are transactional (which I personally don’t – humans are pack animals and like most social species have a degree of observable altruism, in that we in general will often act in the interests of the group rather than ourselves individually) and that sex is a more substantive need than friendship (which, again, I’m not gonna agree with because social contact is very necessary for individual health whereas sex is not. Non-reproductive sex is a fun activity, not a necessity, and reproduction might be necessary for the survival of the species as a whole but not for individual survival.), your argument fails because the transactional model in the bullshit both you and the poster quoted in the article espouse is a) based on the weird idea that men are the ones with all the inbuilt sex drive, b) based on the weirder idea that as a species that has survived by adaptation we should cling to “evolutionary imperatives” that are now useless at a species level and harmful at a personal level, c) in your case, nihilistic pseudoscience of the sort of smug type I usually hear from creepy teenage boys drunkenly trying to impress me with how SMART and ALOOF they are. Do you have an entire A-Level (or non-English equivalent) in biology or philosophy? I’m so impressed, wow.
(Note: maybe it’s just me, but personally I’m much more likely to respond favourably to “by the way, would you like to have sex with me? I find you attractive” than months of pretending to be my friend then dropping me the moment we either have sex or I reject you. Bonus fuck-you points if you do that gaslighting thing many Nice Guys do where if you tell them politely that you’re not interested they claim they’re not hitting on you, then come back all angry and upset if you sleep with someone else or rebuff a physical advance. Being as upfront as “hey let’s bang” can be awkward and intimidating but I guarantee you that as long as you’re willing to take no for an answer and not take it personally it’s gonna be a lot less hurtful to both parties in the long run. Not taking it personally is kind of the key. Sometimes people just don’t want to sleep with you. Doesn’t make you unappealing or unpleasant, just means they’re not feeling it. Do you want to bang everyone you meet? Do you want to bang every one of your friends?Then why should they?)
Ah crap, that got longwinded. Apologies. My excuse is that I haven’t slept all night and I’ve had way too much contact with guys spewing this kind of “””””””intellectual”””””” garbage lately.
Ugh, I read Chandler’s um thing, though I did throw up in my mouth a little when I got to him talking about “sexual market value.” I kinda want to write a long response to all of his “points” but I’m not sure if it’d do much good. However I will respond to one part for now:
I dunno, I see being disingenuous and manipulative to be wrongs they are doing.
David, check out this… bizarre conversation going on in TRP right now about… seducing toddlers, I guess? How ice cream twirlers are total alphas?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/4bivhd/seduction_in_one_picture/
Chandler:
There are several scientists in this community. We understand what science means. I don’t think you do: I think it’s just a word you wave around to make yourself feel justified in your beliefs.
I could be wrong, of course. You could have peer-reviewed, empirically tested, methodologically sound studies backing up every claim you’ve made. I’m sure you’ll be willing to share these to justify your assertions.
Reading far more of that teal deer than anyone of my advanced years (of experience) should have bothered with, I’m struck by something about all of these guys – including regwotsit and the drongos David wrote about.
How many of them have ever done anything in a mixed group or just been part of a non-family mixed group? I’ve been in church/ sport/ school groups, choirs, committees, opera & drama groups, various social groups of couples who help renovate each other’s houses or just play cards or board games. And then there’s working in mixed sex workplaces.
Most workplaces and union committees I was involved with were male dominated. Other groups less so. I’ve had both men and women friends in all those environments. Whether you’re passing each other hammers and screwdrivers while building sets or repairing someone’s walls, or a few people go off to rehearse a difficult piece away from a larger group, or you team up with the husband of one of the couples to de.mo.lish another pair of card or board game players – there is warm friendship, &or practical cooperation and nothing sexual in any of these activities. I’ve got up close beside a bass member of a chorus because it’s easier to sing that way (everyone always attributed it to “sharing” the bigger lung capacity, but there’s something physical happening even if that’s not it.) That closeness is about better singing, not about sex or cuddles or intimacy.
Going to a cafe, pub, home with a bloke because we need to do our report for a union or work or other committee/ conference (and we’re waaay behind with the work) doesn’t mean that horizontal folk-dancing is on anyone’s mind. It means we’ve been too busy – or slacking off – and we need to get this job done so we don’t let everybody else down.
What work or hobbies or pastimes or family or neighbourhood do these dimwits come from that they don’t know how to be friendly – or affectionate or cooperative or playful or purposeful – with women?
Yea, and as young gentlefolk are nary but pawns of natures fickle biotruths, the young lad must needs woo Milady in his most ardent fashion! Iffen thou rejecteth his plea, Milady does thwart nature’s purest gift of gentlemanly qualities! For it is his stalwart integrity, and not his coin, that maketh a true man! Cast him not, foul feemale Gorgons and Feminist harpies, into the direst of friendzones! Or cursed be ye wombe and may dropsey sicken thy petulant offspring of Sir Chadlywick! So sayeth Lord Chandler!
@ mildlymagnificent
Back in my roadie days we’d spend a lot of time working out the best way of stacking speakers and then positioning those stacks to take into account things like resonance and interference patterns to enhance certain frequencies. All sorts of maths involved.
I wonder if there’s something like that going on in singing in groups?
@mildlymagnificent:
What you say is true, but I think there’s more to it than that. I’ve seen male-dominated social and hobby spaces be fiercely defended against female intrusion. I don’t think it’s that they don’t socialise with women: I think it’s that they don’t want to socialise with women, because they want to stay in their comfortable know-nothing bigotry.
Following up on SPDavis’s comment:
Ick! Ick! Ick!
Then there’s this:
Hey, redpillers, my dad was one of those immature, narcissistic, completely lacking in self-awareness kind of “men who set the pace and [kept his wife and family] one step behind, forever reacting.”
Bleccch!
@Freemage
Careful with that pining!
Hello.
I wonder if Throwaway244555 is really serious, because that is really an old school PUA assertion he gaves. That the same old school pretending that ” it’s better to be loved by an ugly person than to be friend with a pretty one” (yeah, i admit, i replace ‘woman’ by ‘person’. May be i should have not). Well, the new school is ok with pretty person friendship. But not because of friendship in itself, of course. No, it is just because they expect that being seen in presence of pretty persons increase their ‘social value’ and thus improve their chances to successfully pick up. In other words : friendship is ok as long it remains a tool to pick up.
Whatever the view/school they are, i sometimes wonder if they are humans or if we really live in the same world/society. Do they live in an all male environment (school, job place, neighborhood…) ? Do they have spent their whole life fleing any friendship of girls/women ? How are they going to do on their working place ? Their way of thinking is quite alien from my point of view. For people a bit socially impaired like me, friendship is gold, whoever the friend is. And avoiding possible friendship for ludicrous reasons is like, i do not know, to stop breathing because you find that it is tiring. I am not sure i am clear, sorry if it is not.
Have a nice day.
@SPDavis Wow, that link was disturbing to read… especially the “all women are like that” and “girls shit test from already at three”, or whatever the age was… makes me kind of want to go #notallwomen (but of course, that would be copying the men… so maybe #almostnowomenatall would be more appropriate.
Also the content of this article gives me the heebie jeebies.
Also again, hi! Been lurking around for a month or so, and I’ve got to say I’m happy I discovered this blog (and its comment section)! It brings me so much joy!
Alan
There’s certainly something going on. When you do it, singing feels much smoother – you get into the “flow” of good musical experience. So it does, sort of, feel as though breathing is easier and the diaphragm holds its position better.
But just because it feels like that it doesn’t mean that’s what’s happening. My suspicion is that it’s more to do with undertones and overtones, resonance generally. If I am (make that was) singing one of those extremely high parts in a quartet or quintet, it seemed to me that I got more of an ‘assist’ from the bass rather than the tenor. Which is a bit odd, because high soprano female leads are much more likely to be teamed up with a tenor than a bass or baritone as romantic lead.
Though often you can get much the same feeling singing with a woman. I never performed this one, but I love it.
As someone who has struggled with developing and maintaining a secure sense of self worth all their life, I see myself in a lot of these guys and can empathise with them to some extent.
I often think about how things could have gone very differently for me with just a little bit less luck. Had I not happened to meet the amazing, kind, loving people who have been my friends and lovers throughout the years, despite how hard I failed at inviting them to do so, and despite how bad I have at times been at being their friend in return, I could easily have ended up just like them. Filled with hatred, fear and resentment of everyone around me, instead of the overwhelming gratitude I experience in this reality. I’d have never been guided by the rewards of friendship and being accepted for who I am, into learning to appreciate, respect and value others, or to understand how great a strength humility is. I’m not sure I’d even be human.
I don’t know what I did better than these redpill dudes to deserve to have those people in my life. Most likely absolutely nothing. It’s quite probably just that I look like really sweet person, so people are more inclined to interpret my behaviour in that light. Even during times when I have actually been quite hateful and broken. I am a harmless, weak afab, nobody has any reason to fear me. It is so much easier for people to gather the courage to take a chance on me than one of those guys. The risks are so much smaller. You don’t hear about someone like me attacking or murdering someone in the news every week.
When you don’t have basic security in your worth as a human being, you’re constantly defending it from imagined attacks, insults and challenges from other people. Perhaps you don’t believe that all humans are inherently valuable. Then you can make yourself feel better by putting others down. It’s a really rotten way to live. These people cause a lot of suffering to others, but the ones who suffer most are always going to be themselves.
I feel really sorry for them, and deeply regret that there seems to be no way to help them at this point. They’ve made the choice now.
Wow, Chandler, your views on sex in the Stone Age are outdated. Current theory now is that strict sexual rules were in place as early as 40,000 years ago.
Back then we were still hunter/gathers and nomadic, so high birth rates were not welcome. Every baby born was anther load to have to tote from place to place. It was best to space your births so that one kid was able to walk well on its own before bringing another helpless baby into the world.
Sorry to disappoint, but men probably weren’t mating with everything female that moved because causing a baby boom would have been frowned upon by the rest of the tribe.
But the caveman sexual market value thing did make me giggle. I’m sure early man sat around discussing the beauty of the females and deciding to which ones were worth taking to bed. Back then if you survived childhood, didn’t suffer from a disability that made life as a nomad hell and hadn’t died of a disease by the time you were old enough to mate, you probably were a hot commodity despite ugly looks because . . . good genes. It was about survival back then, not getting the best looking mate. Imagine that.
The more robust “Random WHTM Posts” features has convinced me of this.
I’ve clicked through to a few, read the comments, and been like, “Hot, damn! That’s some trollin’!”
Lately…they’ve just been sad lately, really.
The more robust “Random WHTM Posts” features has convinced me of this.
I’ve clicked through to a few, read the comments, and been like, “Hot, damn! That’s some trollin’!”
Lately…they’ve just been sad lately, really 🙁
Rather ironic to see all those red pill-poppers banging on about sex, considering that the next time the words ‘gets laid’ appears in the same sentence as any of their names, they will be followed by ‘to rest on Thursday after a service at……’ in the local paper’s hatched, matched, dispatched columns.
I’m answering this right after reading the post, so forgive me if it’s the millionth iteration, buuuut
Really?
My husband will be so sorely disappointed to know this, especially given that he actively encourages our three daughters’ budding feminist thoughts.
I just assumed the opus was a long troll. It’s easy to come up with pseudo-scientific babble – there are generators that do it for you.
Arty Bollocks has some cute ones – they are art related, but you can use it to cough up endless reams of dross. Brevity is appropriate if you want to actually explain your point of view. Purpose prose is if you just want attention.
On the off chance it was serious, here’s some helpful information from Hemmingway App:
Readability: Grade 21 (poor).
3 of 15 sentences: hard to read.
10 of 15 sentences: very hard to read.
10 adverbs: Should be 2.
Two sentences were acceptable:
What visible impact does this have on our modern society?
It is simple science, and you would do well to heed its counsel.
Maybe just cut it down to that, friend!