Categories
evil sexy ladies friend zone men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny post contains sarcasm red pill reddit

Dudes! If you’re friends with a lady, “you’re a vagina,” explains Reddit lady expert

Dogzoned!
Dogzoned!

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.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

291 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
leftwingfox
leftwingfox
4 years ago

I’m having Admiral Stockdale flashbacks.
comment image

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

there are too many feminists to defeat them

http://37.media.tumblr.com/e48097a91d487776b5bd37c2eb5f6468/tumblr_mtv1nv6iC61rl6c79o1_400.gif

real breasted feminists

My favorite species of bird!

And anyway I’m in the wrong forum; I’m actually in action to Troll the transgendered. You despise them too but won’t admit it; feel free to recommend a good url where I can go and wreak mayhem among the gender fraudsters.

comment image

Tessa
Tessa
4 years ago

Regford:

You hate your female boss because you can’t con her like the old guy that got laid off.

Soo, you think women are better bosses, harder to manipulate?

And can I be a lesbian AND a one bedroom suite dweller?? Cause my apartment is one bedroom…

Try harder, that was all pretty boring.

Chandler:

Not surprisingly, a very scanty number of you were actually capable of dealing with the substance of my arguments, which is not altogether surprising, given that I held a very dim view of your collective reading comprehension from the start.

I didn’t want to respond because I just couldn’t take you seriously. This was vindicated by your second paragraph about your bust avatar and oh so important bookshelf. So, I’m convinced you’re just a parody.

On the off chance you’re 100% serious, people not responding seriously to you doesn’t indicate that you’re just spouting too much truth juice for us to handle. It can also mean you’re not saying anything worth responding to. In your case, you try soooooo hard to sound intellectual. Tone it down a few notches. We’re more than happy to counter actual clearly thought out and communicated arguments. Yours unfortunately were neither. So if you truly want us to respond, go back and rewrite your first post with the pretentious pseudointellectualism dialed back to maybe a 3 or 4 instead of 22.

Thanks!

kupo
kupo
4 years ago

I’m going to rename Regford to regex. Because everyone fucking hates regex. If you don’t know what regex even is, don’t worry; you hate it, too. Everyone does.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

Chandler came back, how terribly exciting.

Not surprisingly, a very scanty number of you were actually capable of dealing with the substance of my arguments

What arguments? You didn’t make arguments. You made a whole bunch of unoriginal assertions. That said, this comment thread isn’t your very own debate club; if you choose to come back and make some real arguments, we still might not address them. Nobody here is obligated to care about, respond to, or even read what you say. Doesn’t mean we can’t.

you yourselves would refuse a generous gift because the box in which it came did not suit your liking.

These words are so carefully and deliberately arranged into the worst possible phrase in the English language.

Chandler
Chandler
4 years ago

@TheDreadVampy

Yes, *it* (I thought you leftist schmucks didn’t like using language that “dehumanizes” or “erases” people’s identities?) thinks that Nietzsche is sort of impressive, and so should you. After all, isn’t all the watered down Foucault/deconstructionist/postmodernist claptrap that you critical-theory nincompoops jack off to in your pseudo-intellectual literary criticism circles based off of the totally-unimpressive ideas of this man that you claim to hate so much? I’ve got the strangest feeling that you haven’t even actually engaged with his thought on its own terms, but are merely basing your reactions against it on the fact that you don’t like some of his adherents (of course, the man did say something about people opposing a cause simply because its adherents can’t resist the impulse to be insipid; he predicted feminism!). You probably don’t even understand how Nietzsche’s conception of the “amor fati” differs from that of the Stoics, and your grasp on the “eternal recurrence” can probably be charitably likened to a flipper-baby’s grasp on a vaseline-coated pickle jar. Get back to your comic books.

@kupo

Nice straw man, but I don’t believe that it’s impossible for a woman to be engaged in some kind of STEM field; it’s just incredibly uncommon, even when the very same factors that men enjoy (plus affirmative action) are presently extended to women. Women and men are simply driven to different walks in life, likely based on innate biological differences.

@ All of you

You people can laugh all you like, it won’t change a damned thing. When the world has gone to chaos, and the governments that you have hijacked to suit your innate biological needs for protection have tanked and left us in a state of anarchy, your sense of humor will be all that you have left. I’ve seen the numbers, I’ve done the math; the lifestyles which you all currently enjoy in all of your collective blissful unawareness is but a mass illusion, unsustainable in the long run. Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

Oh look, another asshat who wants some sort of apocalypse/societal collapse to happen because he imagines he’s going to be an alpha survivor who will have all the women begging for his protection, chastened and desperate.

That one just gets funnier every time I see it.

As does the always evidence free assertion that women can’t science.

katz
4 years ago

You people can laugh all you like, it won’t change a damned thing. When the world has gone to chaos, and the governments that you have hijacked to suit your innate biological needs for protection have tanked and left us in a state of anarchy, your sense of humor will be all that you have left.

Well shit, you’re onto me.

katz
4 years ago

But, um, I’ve forgotten what we’re doing that Chandler thinks will destroy civilization. Are we still talking about men and women being friends?

Chandler
Chandler
4 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

“As does the always evidence free assertion that women can’t science.”

Let me bring up Google maps so you show me where on God’s green earth I ever said such a thing. Hold on, let me just go through my previous statements… Ah, here we go!

“Nice straw man, but I don’t believe that it’s impossible for a woman to be engaged in some kind of STEM field…”

I didn’t say that women “can’t science,” just that it’s rare for them to do so. I mean, I know that illocutionary force exists and everything, but are your powers of reading comprehension really so abysmal that you can’t even distinguish between the words “uncommon” and “impossible?”

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

I think it’s laughing at Nietzsche loving misogynists that is supposed to cause the apocalypse?

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Jackie; currently using they/their, he/his, she/her pronouns)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Jackie; currently using they/their, he/his, she/her pronouns)
4 years ago

I’m going to rename Regford to regex. Because everyone fucking hates regex. If you don’t know what regex even is, don’t worry; you hate it, too. Everyone does.

*hisses* Liefeld.

Tessa
Tessa
4 years ago

Chandler

You people can laugh all you like, it won’t change a damned thing. When the world has gone to chaos, and the governments that you have hijacked to suit your innate biological needs for protection have tanked and left us in a state of anarchy, your sense of humor will be all that you have left. I’ve seen the numbers, I’ve done the math; the lifestyles which you all currently enjoy in all of your collective blissful unawareness is but a mass illusion, unsustainable in the long run. Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

Even the cliched wish for society to crumble is sooo damned flowery. He may not ever say anything new, but he sure does say it obnoxiously.

GenJones
GenJones
4 years ago

I think he’s veering off into doomsday prepper rhetoric and is referring to “when the shit hits the fan” or the prediction that our consumer based society and industrial agriculture is poised to collapse, and that people living comfortably in the cities will be in deep shit once centralized supply lines are disrupted. The off-grid movement has some very astute observations and understanding of systems with a while lot of preachy stuff from all over the political spectrum mixed in.

Tessa
Tessa
4 years ago

GenJones:
Nah, it’s typical “When it’s like mad max, that’ll learn you women.”

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

Echoing GenJones, Chandler is not entirely off-base when he says that our lifestyles are unsustainable in the long run. He’s also not telling us anything that we haven’t known for a long, long time. After all, the first Earth Day was in 1970. And some of us Mammotheers are actively working to save this planet, our one and only home.

I’m also gonna echo Tessa and say that, like many, many right wingers, he’s all about the fear & smear.

He’s trying to make us afraid. And he’s smearing us for our feminism. Also, he believes that our understanding of the Stoics is incomplete.

That last one hurt.

A lot.

No, really.

Dalillama
Dalillama
4 years ago

@Kat
You’re giving Chandler too much credit, I’m afraid. His reading list tells me that the total societal collapse he’s predicting is because of the welfare state, rights for marginalized groups, and generally not deferring enough to rich white men, rather than due to any of the actual problems currently facing the world, people like Chandler actually being one of those.

@Chandler
You’re ludicrous.

calmdown
calmdown
4 years ago

These words are so carefully and deliberately arranged into the worst possible phrase in the English language.

“I let you know me, see me. I gave you a rare gift, but you didn’t want it.”

better?

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@Dalillama

You’re giving Chandler too much credit, I’m afraid.

But he says he’s done the math! 🙂

occasional reader
occasional reader
4 years ago

Gibbon, Toynbee, Bede, Thomas Malthus, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Ludwig von Mises, Otto Weininger, Julius Evola, Oswald Spengler

Sure, Weininger is a person the major part of the readers here would love a lot…
Evola is such a luminary that i am blinded by his way of thinking…
No wonder that you think their writings and thoughts are interesting, they just go along with your ideas.
And maybe we know what you refer too with all those “End/fall/decline of the western civilization” authors, because many of your think-alike friends brag about it on the internet. It is sad you do not quote them, they are so enlightning.
I am also sad you forgot this man who had took time to write a book while in jail in the twenties. Sorry, i miss his name because, being part of the declining West, i am not smart and bright as you are.

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

Chandler, you can either claim to care about numbers, or you can take Ludwig von Mises seriously. You get to do one of those two things. Von Mises was an ideological panderer of the lowest order, and empirical data has done to his theories what sunlight did to Dracula. Nobody who takes rigour even slightly seriously can support his work.

If it would help you understand more easily, I can rewrite the above sentences to have worse grammar.

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

Also:

I have chosen to challenge you on your economics, not on the stupid shit you said about gender, the decline of the west, and the rest of it. That stuff is merely you being immature and offensive, saying things that any number of people say every day on the internet. Ironically, every one of them probably fancies themself a courageous free thinker, too.

What I need you to understand is that for all your desire to appear as a rational man who believes in rational things rationally, you are bad at rational thought. You can’t even achieve the one thing you set out to do above all else.

I’d recommend that you find another hobby, because you are badly out of your depth here.

Tragedy of the Commas
Tragedy of the Commas
4 years ago

Funny. A conversation about purple prose occurred just a little earlier this past week.

Are we still talking about men and women being friends?

I thought we were talking about the coming of Gozer the Destroyer? After all, the math has been done and, if the EPA shuts down the vagina containment unit, then the liberated vaginas will friendzone men everywhere! Men and women forced to share space and actually empathize with each as human beings? It’ll lead to mass hysteria!

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

Given how loosely the word “science” is used these days, I would think it appropriate for one to properly denote what they mean by “science” before proclaiming to be one of its practitioners; for all I know, the “scientists” amongst you might simply be those who have majored in something like anthropology, sociology, or the like.

In my circles*, “Anthropology” refers to the study of human and hominid evolution, so I spent a few moments wondering why some dilweed would wank on and on about bonerfeels evo psych then deny that evolution exists before realising he probably meant sociocultural anthropology.

Figures that he’d use adjectives in front of every word except the ones that actually need them. It just wouldn’t be urple** if it was comprehensible!

*For the benefit of Trolly Dee and Trolly Dum, that would be palaeontological ones.
**Not a typo.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
4 years ago

Yes, *it* (I thought you leftist schmucks didn’t like using language that “dehumanizes” or “erases” people’s identities?) thinks that Nietzsche is sort of impressive, and so should you. After all, isn’t all the watered down Foucault/deconstructionist/postmodernist claptrap that you critical-theory nincompoops jack off to in your pseudo-intellectual literary criticism circles based off of the totally-unimpressive ideas of this man that you claim to hate so much?

Color me surprised that your “understanding” of Nietzsche is purely surface.

You people can laugh all you like, it won’t change a damned thing. When the world has gone to chaos, and the governments that you have hijacked to suit your innate biological needs for protection have tanked and left us in a state of anarchy, your sense of humor will be all that you have left.

http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/8/84d2562028_terre.jpg

Lea
Lea
4 years ago

Oh, the preening of the ignorant trolls! Spring has truly begun. Note the deep purple of their prose and their shoddy attempts at reason. Hear their majestic calls, “You’ll regret not flocking to my sad boner one day! Ooooonnnnne daaaaay!”.

Isn’t nature hilarious to behold?

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

PolicyOfMadness, someday I hope to be as awesome as you.

Makroth
Makroth
4 years ago

I’m hoping Chandler is genuine. That would make him even more hilarious.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

kupo:

I’m going to rename Regford to regex. Because everyone fucking hates regex. If you don’t know what regex even is, don’t worry; you hate it, too. Everyone does.

*throaty growl of an apex predator*

That’s such greglandian thing to say.

But frankly, Regford’s posts read like regexp has been involved, along with some rnd() and array functions.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

@calmdown

Better?

Much, thank you. XD. @Chandler, see? It’s possible to express your very same thought without throwing in pointless dependent clauses and archaic expressions.

Get back to your comic books.

So I’m way behind the times here, but I just picked up some of the Avatar: The Last Airbender graphic novels and I’m enjoying the heck out of them. Anybody else reading anything fun?

Newt
Newt
4 years ago

Chandler:

Not surprisingly, […] , which is not altogether surprising,

You’re repetitive, and that makes you somewhat repetitive.

You probably don’t even understand how Nietzsche’s conception of the “amor fati” differs from that of the Stoics

Oh, does only one of them mean “I see injustice but don’t give a fuck”? Which of the two do you adhere to more, and why?

the very same factors that men enjoy (plus affirmative action) are presently extended to women.

Where are all the people claiming, assuming, marketing for and generally reinforcing the notion that boys aren’t that interested in STEM?

You people can laugh all you like

We weren’t waiting for your permission, pal. You have to come up with something fresh.

LindsayIrene
4 years ago

I’m just going to imagine that Chandler looks like this. It makes it more fun.

http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2014/03/06/06-jonathan-winters-monocle.w529.h529.jpg

Anybody else reading anything fun?

I’m listening to Felicia Day’s own reading of her own book, “You’re Never Weird on the Internet (Almost)”. It has me walking around chortling to myself at work.

GenJones
GenJones
4 years ago

I found that imagining his comments being delivered by Yu-Gi-Oh’s Pegasus’ pretentious anime villain voice made the experience of reading them vastly more entertaining.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

Ooh, that sounds good. I love when funny people do readings of their work.

I’ve never gone in for audiobooks, probably because I was working in a bookstore just as they were becoming A Thing, and at that point they cost probably 4 times as much as the source trade paperback. I can probably let go of that decade-old prejudice now.

Edit: I know books on tape have been around far longer than that, but they became a fad on CD at that time. I think the first Harry Potter audiobooks were coming out around then, and they cost a bloody fortune.

Carr
Carr
4 years ago

As someone who is majoring in anthropology, could Chandler explain why he seems to view anthropology and sociology as something less than ”real” science?

You are the sort of people who complain about others having “privilege” while you yourselves would refuse a generous gift because the box in which it came did not suit your liking. Pity

You seem to believe that your post was a gift and we should be grateful you have shared your thoughts with us. Frankly, the presentation sucked. Your posts have been pretty much limited to ”look at me, I know big words”. Congratulations, enter a spelling bee. Complicated words don’t mean you’re intelligent. From my experience, the most intelligent people are the ones who get their point across speaking like normal human beings and not trying to show off how many words they can fit in a sentence. I get the feeling you’re not actually trying to convince the posters here of anything, you just like reading what you wrote and it strokes your ego.

And yes, I did at one time use a marble bust of Caligula as my picture on an account, much like the one I have on my bookcase (which does not, by any means, contain scholarly leather-bound works, but does contain the works of Gibbons, Toynbee, Bede, Thomas Malthus, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Ludwig von Mises, Otto Weininger, Julius Evola, Oswald Spengler, and other luminaries that the lot of you would do well to acquaint yourselves with). What of it?

I don’t know if you’re trolling or you really are that pretentious.

LindsayIrene
4 years ago

Oh yeah, audiobooks are much cheaper now, especially if you get an Audible membership. Not having to deal with CDs any more is a huge plus, too. (Wheeeeee, I can do my hoarding in the Amazon cloud instead of my house!)

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
4 years ago

Chandler wrote:

I’ve seen the numbers, I’ve done the math; the lifestyles which you all currently enjoy in all of your collective blissful unawareness is but a mass illusion, unsustainable in the long run. Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

[Emphasis mine]

Well then by all means, share these numbers of which you speak and show us your equations. Because I’ll bet whatever you’d like that even if you can produce some actual equations that you think support your “analysis,” they’ll be about half as useful as Drake’s Equation.

You know, for someone who was quite happy to denigrate the soft sciences in a previous post, it’s pretty stupid to try and claim you’ve done some sort of quantitative analysis on a set of perceived social ills. But hey, at least you can spell and use grammar correctly! You deserve a participation trophy!

Maybe you can add it to your bookshelf, right next to your slim volume of Yeats…

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
4 years ago

You people can laugh all you like, it won’t change a damned thing. When the world has gone to chaos, and the governments that you have hijacked to suit your innate biological needs for protection have tanked and left us in a state of anarchy, your sense of humor will be all that you have left.

Don’t worry, everyone. Chandler’s collection of Gibbons, Toynbee, Bede, Thomas Malthus, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Ludwig von Mises, Otto Weininger, Julius Evola, Oswald Spengler, and other “luminaries” will save him from the zombie objectivist flensers. The most important survival skill is misogyny.

Why do euphoric edgelord dudes all have the exact same cookie-cutter reading list? I’m surprised Marcus Aurelius, Sun Tzu, and Ayn Rand aren’t in there.

TheDreadVampy
TheDreadVampy
4 years ago

I’ve got the strangest feeling that you haven’t even actually engaged with his thought on its own terms, but are merely basing your reactions against it on the fact that you don’t like some of his adherents

I’ve got the strangest feeling that the reason you and your ilk get on so well with Nietzsche is his repeated assertions that if you disagree with him it’s because you JUST DON’T GET IT HE’S TOO SMART FOR MORTAL MINDS. I mean, I’ve read Nietzsche. Then I relegated his works to the bathroom in my dad’s house, which is where all my family’s books mysteriously seem to end up when they’re too pretentious, self-aggrandizing or ridiculously verbose and deliberately inaccessible. I fully understand why Nietzsche is so popular with assholes and it’s not because the rest of us just haven’t bothered to comprehend his genius.

Carr
Carr
4 years ago

Buttercup, there was a post on Return of kings, where they were discussing a translation of The Art of War. And it was very cute, considering none of the people commenting had read it in mandarin or classical Chinese,nor were they people who translated for a living. But they were so smug about having read two different translations.
It was a pretty good description of the whole PUA, MRA, whatever-A movement: they rarely have any idea what they’re talking about, but they’ll be so pleased with themselves for talking about it. Since men are just born with all kinds of knowledge and the penis makes you a genius on every topic.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

Carr,
It reminds me of a post we had maybe last year about a PUA who tried to mansplain to the woman he was targeting about the field she worked in. He was bragging about how bored and disengaged she was with him. He assumed it was because she was ignorant and only employed in the field because of the pussy pass and he was overwhelming her with his genius. At no point did it occur to him that she was just contemptuous of him because he was full of shit.

Carr
Carr
4 years ago

Unfortunately, I know people like this. If you present your arguments, you’re stupid and don’t know what you’re talking about, because they just know that they’re right. Sure, they haven’t read anything that might come close to a peer reviewed article on the topic they’re discussing, but they read a blog post about it once. And even if they haven’t read a blog post, they just know, because they have so much life experience.
And if you don’t bother to discuss with them, because why bother, you’re stupid, because you couldn’t refute their umm…arguments.

TheDreadVampy
TheDreadVampy
4 years ago

Anybody else reading anything fun?

Speaking of going back to comic books, I just got a new copy of Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics, so I’m having a long overdue re-read to see if it can help me fix up some lacklustre layouts in the graphic novel I’m working on. Plus for my birthday I bought myself an indie anthology called A Graphic Cosmology, which is a collection of nine-page comics about the creation of the universe. It’s a beautiful book and I’m so excited about it!

calmdown
calmdown
4 years ago

“You’re Never Weird on the Internet (Almost)”

Her book tour is coming to my area and I am hoping to get a copy signed by the Queen of Geeks herself!! I have a pick n’ mix of anxiety disorders so going to a place with people and interacting with someone I really admire is going to be tough. However, I really feel it’s something I need (and want) to do, so I’m gonna be there no matter what!

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
4 years ago

@EJ:

Von Mises was an ideological panderer of the lowest order, and empirical data has done to his theories what sunlight did to Dracula. Nobody who takes rigour even slightly seriously can support his work.

Yep!

The only people I know who take him seriously are those who chant “free market” like saying the phrase over and over again makes their arguments valid.

As someone who is majoring in anthropology, could Chandler explain why he seems to view anthropology and sociology as something less than ”real” science?

Because he’s a cretinous dumbass, more or less.

Nick Gotts
Nick Gotts
4 years ago

People live long now and those who sign a marriage licence at 25 are sentenced to >60 years in marital prison. – Regford

Hey, I hadn’t realised divorce had been outlawed! Possibly because, being happily married, I don’t want one, but still, I pride myself on keeping up with current affairs. When did it happen?

Nick Gotts
Nick Gotts
4 years ago

Bertrand Russell (philosopher, logician, radical political activist and randy old goat) had Nietzsche’s number. After noting the latter’s frequently expressed contempt for women (“Thou goest to woman? Do not forget thy whip.”), Russell says (A History of Western Philosophy, chapter on Nietzsche):

but nine out of ten women would get the whip away from him, and he knew it, so he kept away from women, and soothed his wounded vanity with unkind remarks.

Nick Gotts
Nick Gotts
4 years ago

Von Mises was an ideological panderer of the lowest order, and empirical data has done to his theories what sunlight did to Dracula. – EJ

But von Mises took the precaution of declaring in advance that his ideas were completely immune from empirical refutation, because reasons.

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
4 years ago

@Nick Gotts:

Bertrand Russell is awesome.

And, yeah, von Mises’ unwarranted self-certitude seems to have rubbed off on Libertarians in general. Perfect example of such? Penn Jillette. The guy never entertains the idea he may be wrong and that others might be right – even when there’s plenty of evidence to prove that, he dismisses it and sticks to his insipid assumption.

No wonder the CATO Institute uses him as an over-glorified cheerleader…

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

Michelle Bachman is a Von Mises fan. Enough said.