Categories
alt-lite alt-right entitled babies incels literal nazis men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA red pill

Who Goes Red Pill? A sequel to Dorothy Thompson’s Nazi-guessing parlor game

Take the fucking blue pill

It’s PLEDGE DRIVE time again! If you’re a fan of this blog, please help fund its continued existence by clicking the button below. THANKS!

donate button

By David Futrelle

In 1941, writer Dorothy Thompson invented what she described as “an interesting and somewhat macabre parlor game” called “Who Goes Nazi?” The idea was simple: the next time you’re at a party, or some other social gathering, take a look at those around you and try to guess which ones would, “in a showdown … go Nazi.”

You don’t do this out loud, of course, unless you really want to be punched.

The game feels as relevant at this point in history as it was when Thompson wrote her classic Harper’s essay explaining the rules of the game and offering a series of descriptions of the assorted social types she thought would (or most definitely would not) turn into literal Nazis when the chips were down — from the bank vice president who “has risen beyond his real abilities by virtue of health, good looks, and being a good mixer” (definitely a Nazi in embryo) to the downwardly mobile editor who manages to be intellectual without being a snob about it, about whom Thompson remarks that she “will put my hand in the fire that nothing on earth could ever make him a Nazi.”

Thompson’s portraits of these assorted social types, and her theories about who would and wouldn’t go Nazi, are a little too pat for my tastes; she basically thinks that nice people are immune to Nazism while mean and bitter types are drawn to it like moths to a lamp.

“Kind, good, happy, gentlemanly, secure people never go Nazi,” she wrote.

They may be the gentle philosopher whose name is in the Blue Book, or Bill from City College to whom democracy gave a chance to design airplanes—you’ll never make Nazis out of them. But the frustrated and humiliated intellectual, the rich and scared speculator, the spoiled son, the labor tyrant, the fellow who has achieved success by smelling out the wind of success—they would all go Nazi in a crisis.

Not far from the truth, I think, just a little oversimplified.

Still, the game itself is genius.

Over the last couple of years, for obvious reasons, Thompson’s article has been resurrected and passed around on social media, and several writers have proposed modern updates of her famous game, from the “office edition” to one focused on media figures. The only trouble with playing the game now is that so many of those who would have gone gone Nazi in Thompson’s day already have, in ours.

While the original game is still worth playing, let me propose an alternate version that might be even more entertaining for readers of this blog: Who Goes Red Pill?

Think of the various people you’ve recently met — in real life or online — and try to figure out who among them is most likely to embrace the toxic misogynistic ideology that unites the otherwise disparate groups that make up the manosphere, from MRAs to MGTOWS to incels to PUAs. What personality traits do they exhibit? What behaviors are obvious (or not-so-obvious) tells?

Are they NiceGuys (TM) stewing in aggrieved entitlement? Do they like South Park maybe a little bit too much? Do they get suspiciously angry about female superheroes? Are they fans of Pewdiepie, or Joe Rogan, or Jordan Peterson? Do they complain that women are sexually harassing them by wearing yoga pants? Do they know more than Chris Hansen does about age-of-consent laws? Do they describe themselves as “equity feminists” or “egalitarians?”

The game is a little trickier than it might at first appear. Some of these Jordan-Peterson-loving NiceGuys have already swallowed the Red Pill (and sometimes have even embraced the even more nilhilistic Black Pill), thus disqualifying them as candidates for the game.

Others may exhibit several seemingly obvious tells — but their flirtation with the Red Pill may end up being little more than a passing phase. I’m not sure I quite understand just what makes one person a Red-Pill-swallower and another a Red-Pill-spitter-outer. But maybe you do.

Share your own thoughts below as to what personality types you think are most drawn to the Red Pill (or to Nazism, if you’d prefer to play the original version). Let the games begin!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

265 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

It never fails to annoy me when dudes like iron cthulu act like sexual or romantic frustration is an issue only for men. That issue is pretty damn universal, and no, it is not a political issue that needs solving on a systemic level when men can’t get laid, or get dumped or whatever.

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

It never fails to annoy me when dudes like iron cthulu act like sexual or romantic frustration is an issue only for men.

Yes!!! Funny though that when a *woman* as an individual exercises agency to DO something about that issue in her life and exchange frustration for fulfillment and doesn’t act entitled about it (because she’s without the power to act entitled anyway) THEN I’m sooooo mean and uncaring and such a slut and not a good friend blah blah blah. Only about 1 in 100 guys I see are physically attractive to me but I used my creativity to find my way to one.

rv97
rv97
10 months ago

Thus making men generally pathetic.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved

used my creativity to find my way to one.

Good for you. If only more people could be so creative to get what they want without harming others in the process.
Of course, when it comes to angry misogynists I shudder to think what “creativity” would mean for them. Maybe it would mean what Heartiste said, which ranged from idiotic to abusive.
Then again, as shown time and time again, conservatives are not very good at originality or creativity.

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

@Naflgar

Thank you! My BDSM group isn’t exclusively femdom but we’re more oriented to that and we like that the group is more about the women and what we want rather than the kind that really just caters to men’s fetishes without it being mutual (like some pro dommes I guess. And I apologize if I sound like I’m shaming women who choose that area of sexwork and don’t mean to). So in our group the only cis guys not part of a couple allowed in have to be *hot* by the women’s standards. (Fuck any incels who think that’s not faaaaaaiiiiir.) But cishet guys who are physically attractive enough and also kind and masculine are really really rare so it’s not like I just walk in and they’re lined up. And to be allowed to take one as a slave I have to meet qualifications that take effort like designing outfits and knowing about a real whip and safety and writing scenes that are like little one act plays. I mean I LOVE it but the fulfillment isn’t just handed to me which is what whiner incels and PUA creeps say happens for women.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
10 months ago

They’re impeaching him now.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
10 months ago

Majority of House members vote for first article of impeachment

A majority of House members have now voted “yes” on the first article of impeachment, but it is not official until the end of the vote is called.

The vote is currently 219-164.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/dec/18/trump-impeachment-vote-today-live-latest-news-updates-democrats-house

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
10 months ago

Trump becomes third president in US history to be impeached

The House has passed the first article of impeachment against Trump, abuse of power, by a vote of 230-197.

Donald Trump is officially the third president in US history to be impeached by the House.

The members will now move on to the second article of impeachment, which is obstruction of Congress.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Surplus
I know, and future generations will know that Donald Trump was impeached. They will also know that the Republicans were spineless, with not a one of them breaking party formation (with the exception of Justin Amash, who left the party beforehand).

Maybe they’ll even know that Tulsi Gabbard voted “present” rather than voting to impeach. More evidence that Gabbard is gearing up to be a spoiler candidate.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
10 months ago

Second article of impeachment passes

The House has now passed the second article of impeachment, which is obstruction of Congress. The final vote was 229-198, with only Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard voting “present.”

Trump has been impeached on both abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and the two articles will now taken up by the Senate in a trial to determine whether he should be removed from office.

It is widely expected the president will be acquitted by the Republican-controlled Senate, but the importance of this moment cannot be understated.

A majority of the House of representatives has declared that Trump has abused his power and obstructed Congress, and he will go down in history as only the third US president to ever be impeached.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Surplus
If I didn’t already think Tulsi Gabbard was preparing to run as a spoiler to re-elect Trump, I would now. She refused to vote because she thought it was too “tribal” and “partisan.” Between her endorsement of Narendra Modi, her anti-LGBTQIPA+ work, her appearances on Tucker Carlson’s white nationalist show, and now this, it’s pretty obvious what she’s actually doing.

Anonymous
Anonymous
10 months ago

@Surplus

Both Trump and the GOP in both parts of Congress has gone berserk now. I almost expect a civil war to break out regardless of the outcome.

I’ll be looking into bunkers if anybody needs me.

Aaron
Aaron
10 months ago

If I didn’t already think Tulsi Gabbard was preparing to run as a spoiler to re-elect Trump, I would now.

It’s fair to dislike her (I don’t really like her, though like Yang I think she sometimes brings an interesting perspective to the table), but she’s not going to do this. She’s trying to position herself as a new kind of Democrat, though I admit I’m not quite clear on the details. Maybe the Congressional equivalent of the anti-woke left? We’ll see.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Aaron
Maybe she isn’t, but I think she’s seriously harming the party, has a sketchy history, and might be doing the harm deliberately. I mean, she hangs with Tucker Carlson more than any liberal media and she openly attacks various further left individuals.

Dalillama
Dalillama
10 months ago

@Aaron

She’s trying to position herself as a new kind of Democrat,

Bullshit. Clinton’s* “Third Way” crap is a huge part of how we got here to beggin with, and Gabbard’s horseshit isn’t any newer now than his was then.

*President Clinton, though Hillary was certainly an advocate for it at the time and hasn’t changed positions significantly since then.

Aaron
Aaron
10 months ago

Bullshit. Clinton’s* “Third Way” crap is a huge part of how we got here to beggin with, and Gabbard’s horseshit isn’t any newer now than his was then.

Er, what? First of all, I’m not endorsing Gabbard’s politics, only noting something she is trying to do.

Secondly, Gabbard may be many things, but she is sure as hell not synonymous with the Clintons, except insofar as she’s trying to establish a different kind of politics on the national stage. But so is Bernie Sanders. And so was Trump.

Dalillama
Dalillama
10 months ago

Er, what? First of all, I’m not endorsing Gabbard’s politics, only noting something she is trying to do.

What she’s trying to do is kiss up to white supremacists, as Naglfar pointed out.

Secondly, Gabbard may be many things, but she is sure as hell not synonymous with the Clintons

Trying to be a “new kind of Democrat” who works with Republicans to pass Republican legislation is what Clinton did. That’s what you’re saying Gabbard is doing. Thus the comparison.

,

except insofar as she’s trying to establish a different kind of politics on the national stage.

Except that she’s doing no such thing; she’s bringing nothing to the table that hasn’t been there for decades.

But so is Bernie Sanders

An FDR-style populist without Roosevelt’s political clout and savvy. Not actually new.
.

And so was Trump.

In what way? Trump is Nixon, but louder and more petty.

IronCthulhu
IronCthulhu
10 months ago

@Yutolia

Go fuck yourself.

Jesus Christ that was uncalled for. Merry Christmas to you too.

@Viscaria

Could you define “divorce rape,” please, if you’re going to use the term.

A man is left penniless, living out of his car, and unable to see his children anymore because the family court fucked him over.

I mean, I assume it’s always women doing it to men.

Besides the point for the purposes of this post. It’s one of the things that causes men to take the redpill. That was the question I was answering.

@Naglfar

even a messy divorce is not the same as rape.

You understand that words aren’t always used literally right? Like the phrase “I’m gonna kill him” doesn’t actually mean you intend to commit murder? You should understand that the word “rape” in this context means to royally fuck someone over.

@Weird

This type of trauma is resultant from a LACK OF HAVING EXPECTATIONS MET. If someone embraces igno-right-wing ideology because of these events, that person was already practicing MRA/MGTOW lifestyle.

Again, I was answering a question about who it is that goes redpill. It doesn’t matter if you think the reasons are justified ones. Irrelevant.

@StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved

Hi Stacey! Wow you’re reading an awful lot into my post.

NOT MY DAMN PROBLEM

Who’s saying it’s your problem? I was answering a question about who goes redpill. You’re being obtuse.

You are probably the type that would leer at me

I don’t know what you look like so I couldn’t say.

@Weird

There seem to be commenters hovering around the “who HAS to go red pill”… Like there’s those who DO, n those who DONT, and those who HAVE NO CHOICE!

I’m talking about those who DO.

But in any case, if the experience of being disappointed causes stress, GET HELP FOR THE STRESS, don’t take it out on the PERSON who is the “object of your desires.”

None of this has anything to do with my post. I’m talking about what makes people adopt the redpill ideology. It’s a system of beliefs about how the world works. What they do as a result of adopting those beliefs is a separate issue.

@weirwoodtreehugger

It never fails to annoy me when dudes like iron cthulu act like sexual or romantic frustration is an issue only for men.

Did I act like that?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Again, I was answering a question about who it is that goes redpill. It doesn’t matter if you think the reasons are justified ones. Irrelevant.

Oh, please. Nobody uses the term “divorce rape” other than manurespherians. If you were speaking from a non misogyny sympathetic position, you’d have said something more along the lines of “men who’ve gone through a difficult divorce.”

Did I act like that?

Yes. See above.

I’m not new here, bub. Don’t even bother trying.

TacticalProgressive
TacticalProgressive
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

Divorce isn’t rape dingus; and trying force blatant and deliberate false equivalence is to trivialize actual rape itself.

Divorce is Divorce. Rape is Rape.

Even if, supposedly, a man is left penniless, living out of his car, and unable to see his children anymore because the family court, as you so put it “fucked him over”; all it is a Divorce.

Rape is a term to response to an unwanted and non-consensual sex act.
A divorce is the legal closure of marriage.
Because news flash: words mean things; and you and your ilk are turning words into prolapsed additives devoid of actual meaning.

Thing is though that you and your ilk refuse to admit is that:

a.) men typically do much better financially after a divorce as opposed to women mostly because men often continue to work and don’t have as many costs, whereas in contrast women who don’t start working suffer financial penalties)…

…and b.) comparing losing an arbitrary amount of money, and child visitation hurdles to an actual sexual assault is a fucking terrible and intellectually dishonest thing to do.

Besides, aren’t you Manosphere types also alwyas the ones saying how you guys hate paying child support and alimony for these kids you supposedly want to see yet don’t want to actually care for and want to force women to have when you don’t want to take responsibility to care for those kids you had a hand in making and had the easy and safer part of the job in making in the first place?

The intellectual dishonesty and bad faith coming from you is palpable.

kupo
kupo
10 months ago

Lmao, he really thinks he did something, there.

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

Saying “not my problem” is a figurative way to say it’s not the problem of any particular woman or women in general that a man experienced romantic or sexual frustration (meaning that’s no justification from him or anyone holding harmful ideas like redpill ideas.

Because, like YOU say in your spainly way

You understand that words aren’t always used literally right? 

So figurative language should be ok.

Sooooo lucky you could explain to me that not all language has to be literal!

Lainy
Lainy
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

I’m sorry but you can only use the words divorce rape if the divorce leaves you with a bleeding asshole and a bitemark taken out of your skin like my rape did to me. If it doesn’t maybe don’t use it then

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

I don’t know what you look like so I couldn’t say.

Because obviously whether or not leering is ok depends on whether I meet your beauty standard.

If you had ANY idea how idiotic you are for going down the road of whose beauty standards and body type standards I might happen to meet and way exceed (even though I don’t care about them but look the way I do because of what *I* happen to fucking want myself)

Aaron
Aaron
10 months ago

An FDR-style populist without Roosevelt’s political clout and savvy. Not actually new.

Well, of course. Not completely new. (I think Sanders’ approach is actually quite a bit different from FDR’s, but I agree that there are also some similarities.) But a politics that hasn’t been seen on the national level in a long time, and which is out of joint with, or even to some degree opposed to, both major party establishments.

Trying to be a “new kind of Democrat” who works with Republicans to pass Republican legislation is what Clinton did. That’s what you’re saying Gabbard is doing. Thus the comparison.

Eh. First of all, no, I did not say that. What I said was that I’m not entirely sure what sort of politician Gabbard is trying to be. It’s true that she seems at least somewhat sympathetic to some Republican ideas.

But she also supported Bernie Sanders in 2016, and has repeatedly expressed admiration for him over the past four years or so – hardly something a Clintonian “triangulator” would do. And in her foreign policy she is an isolationist, which goes against the orthodoxy in both parties. (Though admittedly under Trump the GOP has become somewhat less interventionist.)

Except that she’s doing no such thing; she’s bringing nothing to the table that hasn’t been there for decades.

An isolationist Democrat who supported Sanders in 2016, but hangs out on Fox News and has a (somewhat, relatively speaking) socially conservative record? I don’t know. Again, nothing is completely new, but that seems pretty idiosyncratic to me.

So again: her views are eclectic, and at this point I don’t have a strong read on exactly what her endgame is. But it’s not particularly helpful to align her with the “Third Way” because she, like, agrees with the GOP about some stuff.

Hippodameia
Hippodameia
10 months ago

Gabbard has also been hanging out with Mike Huckabee.

https://www.wonkette.com/tulsi-gabbard-just-hangin-with-mike-huckabee-like-regular-democratic-candidates-do

She can fuck off.

IronCthulhu

Jesus Christ that was uncalled for. Merry Christmas to you too.

You can also piss off, but fucking off is better. Much better.

Fuck off.

Dreidl
Dreidl
10 months ago

@Alan Robertshaw & others

At the risk of outing my real identity, I’m a well-known kinky leatherworker who apprenticed to David Morgan. Please don’t use whip thongs for suspension. For starters, good whips can take years to obtain and cost over $1000 US. Surely people have more edifying ways of destroying fine craftsmanship than doing breaking strength tests.

The kangaroo and calfskin high-end whips might hold bodyweight once or twice, but won’t crack or throw accurately afterwards. The cheap cowhide ones often have waste rope fibers and paper padding inside, while the poorly-tanned hide covers shred from cracking them, much less hanging from them. Expensive cowhide cover with rawhide center bullwhips *might* support bodyweight a few times, but also at the expense of destroying accuracy from the degradation of the interlocking helix braiding geometry. Bodyweight stress would also damage any leather attachment to the swivel mechanism connecting the thong to the rigid handle.

If you must use a braided thong-like item to hang from, try a rawhide lariat. Whether twisted or braided, they’re designed for pulling stress. And – they can be thrown at a target or cracked. Not as easily as a whip, but even the fanciest whip is just tapered, multi-layered rope.

@Alan

There are multiple artificial-fibre quality bullwhip makers (even David Morgan used to sell them). Some base their whips on marine rope, others use paracord. Both would stretch a lot under bodyweight, but should stay usable afterward for other whip activities. The manufacturers may be able to answer any questions.

Stay safe, everyone!

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

@Dreidl

Thank you so much for being here and sharing your expertise with us. It really amazes me how many brilliant and accomplished people there are here on WHTM.

Dalaila
Dalaila
10 months ago

Well if those assholes use “equity feminist” I guess I might stop. But I’m not comfortable identifying as a regular feminist just because I know it closes people’s minds, and I think there are a few non-horrible people who’ve been misled by carefully skewed media and cringe compilations on YouTube. Probably not most, but some; there are ex red pillers, after all.
I’ll just say I’m not not a feminist.

Dalillama
Dalillama
10 months ago

@Dalaila
Destroying your ability to communicate with feminists in order to approach members of groups that want to kill you seems like a bad tradeoff to me, since anyone who’s scared off by the word feminism isn’t going to listen to you to begin with.

Aaron
Aaron
10 months ago

Maybe she isn’t, but I think she’s seriously harming the party, has a sketchy history, and might be doing the harm deliberately. I mean, she hangs with Tucker Carlson more than any liberal media and she openly attacks various further left individuals.

I think this is a reasonable take, though IMO her ability to damage the party is extremely limited. Her support is very niche – for now, anyway. Again, I’m not sure where she goes after 2020. I could see her defecting to a post-Trump GOP still influenced by a more sophisticated “Trumpism.” I could also see her sliding more toward the Sanders left, though with a kind of reactionary “anti-woke” cultural politics.

Or, (and I think this is different from the previous two scenarios) maybe she becomes a full-on, self-styled “social conservative, fiscal liberal” whether as a Democrat or Republican. This is a hugely underserved constituency, and if Gabbard is ever to become a major political figure, I think this is how she’d do it.

Definitely not Steve
Definitely not Steve
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

Mate. Sit down for a second. Take a breath. Don’t type anything for a full several minutes.

You said something that a lot of people who read it thought was a problem. Do you think this line-by-line refutation of their responses is a good strategic use of your time?

It might make you feel momentarily better, but you’d just be stirring the pot some more and it’s not changing anyone’s mind about what you said.

You can do better than that. Your brain is capable of writing better words and taking a smarter course of action.

I won’t tell you what course of action to take – you have lots of options and you get the opportunity to figure out which one is actually good for you and the people you are interacting with. All I can ask is that you take a good second to think before you type.

Because if the choice you make is only going to annoy people and make them think you’re an idiot, then you have chosen poorly.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

You understand that words aren’t always used literally right? Like the phrase “I’m gonna kill him” doesn’t actually mean you intend to commit murder? You should understand that the word “rape” in this context means to royally fuck someone over.

If it means to royally fuck someone over, then say that instead. The only people who use rape to mean that are misogynistic assholes like you who don’t care about actual rape victims.

Not Edward
Not Edward
10 months ago

I am a man and I was a virgin, dateless and despairing for a very long period of time, and resented it. I don’t recall whether I was being exposed to any “red pill propaganda” at the time, mainly because I have an extremely poor long term memory for this sort of personal historical recollection. I can’t see how, though, I could have sensibly ended up swallowing it if I was.
The point is, I liked (and like) women. I liked women a lot, which was why I wanted to sleep with them and why it distressed me that none of them seemed to like me enough to want to sleep with me.
What I am getting at is that, while I may have been exposed to plenty of misogynist and sexist attitudes, the whole MRA, incel, red pill thing was never going to appeal to me because it would rely on me simultaneously wanting to sleep with women (or at least being upset about not getting to) without at the same time either liking them or caring whether they like me in return. And whatever else was (and is) wrong about me I was (and am not) that kind of arsehole (whatever other kind I may be) and I can’t get my head around the thought process that would mean somebody would be.
Whether there is or us not that fundamental attitude present is to my mind how you can work out whether someone is a potential MRA / Incel / red piller etc, as far as I can see, and it’s not (which may reassure some) going to be affected by whether they started visiting dodgy websites, or listening to dodgy internet “thinkers”, or however resentful or frustrated they may be at not getting laid.

IronCthulhu
IronCthulhu
10 months ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

Oh, please. Nobody uses the term “divorce rape” other than manurespherians. If you were speaking from a non misogyny sympathetic position, you’d have said something more along the lines of “men who’ve gone through a difficult divorce.”

Irrelevant. I was answering the question of who goes redpill, not making a pitch for it. That would only get me banned anyway & defeat the purpose.

@TacticalProgressive

Divorce isn’t rape dingus; and trying force blatant and deliberate false equivalence is to trivialize actual rape itself. Divorce is Divorce. Rape is Rape.

Please don’t trivialize the word “prolapse” then, since we’re all so big on literalism.

@StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved

Because obviously whether or not leering is ok depends on whether I meet your beauty standard.

Oh I see, but it does depend on whether or not I meet YOUR “beauty” standard does it?

And yeah it’s not leering if I think he’s hot.

Hypocrisy much? What’s good for you is good for me. Here take this song to heart: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIlFlkRZMSE

meaning that’s no justification from him or anyone holding harmful ideas like redpill ideas

Redpillers don’t believe their ideas are harmful or else they wouldn’t be redpillers.

@Definitely not Steve

Do you think this line-by-line refutation of their responses is a good strategic use of your time?

Dude I’m unwinding after work. Strategic use of my time is not high on my priority list.

You can do better than that. Your brain is capable of writing better words and taking a smarter course of action

Thanks dad. Can I go outside and play in the snow with Billy now?

Viscaria
Viscaria
10 months ago

Could you define “divorce rape,” please, if you’re going to use the term.

A man is left penniless, living out of his car, and unable to see his children anymore because the family court fucked him over.

Oh, I see. Since men tend to do better than women financially after m/f divorce, I’m assuming this is like five dudes? Five dudes who the Court apparently thinks are a huge risk to their children, since they don’t even have supervised visitation? Okay. Rape is a bad analogy for that. Maybe you should call it “divorce fever dream cooked up by men who hate women and believe that all marital assets belong ultimately to them and they’re just generously allowing their wives and children to use them as long as they remain married.”

My cocktail guest most likely to take the red pill is someone who expresses the belief that paying spousal support is kinda equivalent to rape if you think about it, although I’ll confess I’ve never actually heard that at a party. Second place goes to men who say, “She’s got me over a barrel, since if we get divorced she gets all my money,” something two different men have said to me at two different parties.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Irrelevant. I was answering the question of who goes redpill, not making a pitch for it. That would only get me banned anyway & defeat the purpose.

Just because you keep saying “irrelevant” doesn’t mean your words are actually irrelevant. And the hinting around that you have some great truth bombs that would get you banned is not really helping your case here.

Moon Custafer
Moon Custafer
10 months ago

@ Jenora Feuer:

I first heard of the Prisoner’s Dilemma from a friend who told me how, when it came up in one of his university classes, a fellow-student who’d grown up in the old Soviet Union or one of its satellites responded with “but doesn’t everybody know that if the police say they’ve already got evidence against you, they’re lying to trick you into a confession? Of course you don’t talk!” and that has always framed my view of the scenario.

Dengler
Dengler
10 months ago

It’s silly for people above ITT to slam Tulsi for appearing at far-right talk-shows. She is doing precisely what a good orator and politician is supposed to do – facing her oponents and trying to reach them, to make them change their views. Was it wrong for the Civil Rights leaders to debate racists? She is fighting for working class, not for “woke” hipsters, who are more concerned with the POTUS being rude than with America’s foreign policy killing hundreds of thousands people in the Middle East and North Africa each year.

Shadowplay
10 months ago

She is doing precisely what a good orator and politician is supposed to do – facing her oponents and trying to reach them

True.

I guess you could say she is “present.”

Catalpa
Catalpa
10 months ago

Because obviously whether or not leering is ok depends on whether I meet your beauty standard.

Oh I see, but it does depend on whether or not I meet YOUR “beauty” standard does it?

And yeah it’s not leering if I think he’s hot.

Hypocrisy much?

If you are unable to distinguish the difference between “granting consent to have something done to you” and “deciding to do something to someone else regardless of their consent”, then frankly I’m not surprised that you’re equating divorce to rape.

And honestly I hope that women stay the hell away from you, for their own safety.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Dengler,

Stealing the children of refugees and putting them in concentration camps, sexually assaulting dozens of women (including at least one 13 year old Jeffrey Epstein victim), appointing another rapist to the supreme court, budding up to dictators, legalizing discrimination against LGBTQ people by health care providers, the Muslim ban, and spreading Kremlin talking points while attacking our presidential election for the second time is not what I’d call rude. It’s monstrous. And it’s not like this list of horrible things Trump has done is comprehensive.

Also, Tulsi is pro Assad, pro Modi, and quite possibly pro Putin, so don’t even try to sell her as the peace candidate.

Anyway, if objecting to rape and genocidal racism makes me a woke hipster, than call me a woke hipster I guess. I thought it was just being halfway decent though.

Dengler
Dengler
10 months ago

I completely agree, Trump is horrible, but so is the entire US establishment. America had had Third-World levels of income inequality, social immobility and incarceration rate before Orange Man’s election. Mainstream Democrats haven’t addressed these problems.

is pro Assad, pro Modi, and quite possibly pro Putin,

She is simply anti-interventionist, that doesn’t make her anything but pro-American. Refusing to antagonize nuclear powers is a simple common sense.

ry to sell her as the peace candidate

She is against starting new wars, so, yes, she is literally THE peace candidate.

StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved
10 months ago

@IronCthulhu

Like the ever brilliant Catalpa says

If you are unable to distinguish the difference between “granting consent to have something done to you” and “deciding to do something to someone else regardless of their consent”, then frankly I’m not surprised that you’re equating divorce to rape.

Yes.

Whether or not it’s ok for a man or anyone of any gender to stare at me depends on these things:

Am I at work? If I am at work part of my job is to look a certain way so that my boss’s clients have a nice time. That certain way happens to be with aligned cishet ideas of conventional attractiveness for women but that doesn’t even matter because the issue is consent. If a client of any gender is normal and nice not only can they look all they want but I will do my best to make them feel welcome and enjoy themselves. They are supposed to look at me and I like it and it’s actually an art form but I doubt you’d get that.

If I’m not at work:

Do I like it that the person doing the looking is looking? If he’s a man then NO I don’t like it and it’s NOT ok to stare at me *unless* he’s tall, has a handsome face with chiseled features and dark hair and eyes and an athletic muscular ripped body that I can see, is smart, kind and compliant and does what I tell him but without being a wimp about it and still being masculine… in which case he can stare all day and I’ll pose. 🙂 Other than that the answer is no and staring at my body becomes a creepy leer which is in no way OK regardless of what he or anyone else wants.

See this is an example of how *consent* works. Can you really not see that?

Is the idea of another person’s own desires making a difference really so strange to you that you need to get a new world view which is what red pill is supposed to be.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Has anyone here praised the political establishment? I haven’t seen it.

And Bernie Sanders with his explicit anti-war stance and Elizabeth Warren with her explicitly anti-corruption/dark money stance are both far more deserving of the peace candidate mantle.

No, I don’t have time to explain to you how corruption and war are connected.

Dengler
Dengler
10 months ago

Well, I like Bernie a lot, too, he says the right things and has done plenty of these, too. If I were American, I would rather vote for him than for Tulsi, but I still respect her very much.

Elizabeth Warren with her explicitly anti-corruption/dark money

She has made a lot of good points, but for me she is too ready to compromise and bend for pragmatic reasons.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Dengler

She is simply anti-interventionist, that doesn’t make her anything but pro-American. Refusing to antagonize nuclear powers is a simple common sense.

So, what you’re saying is that she is “America First.” Hmm…I wonder who else said that?

@WWTH

And Bernie Sanders with his explicit anti-war stance and Elizabeth Warren with her explicitly anti-corruption/dark money stance are both far more deserving of the peace candidate mantle.

Not to mention that Warren and Sanders didn’t get to their positions of power by explicitly running on an anti-LGBTQIPA+ platform.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Yeah, how horrible of Warren to actually understand how our political system works and knows you can’t wave a magic wand and get everything you want passed with no court challenge. God, brogressives are exhausting.

Dengler
Dengler
10 months ago

“America First.” Hmm…I wonder who else said that?

So? If Hitler, Stalin and Chikatilo drank water, then whe shouldn’t do it, right?

anti-LGBTQIPA+ platform.

It was a nasty thing of her, sure. I admit, she is not a saint, but she definitely stands for good in most aspects.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Dengler

It was a nasty thing of her, sure. I admit, she is not a saint, but she definitely stands for good in most aspects.

So far we’ve found quite a number of unsavory aspects of Tulsi. I can’t think of many where she stands for anything uniquely good that other candidates aren’t better at.

Oh, and that’s the first time I’ve heard the “drink water” defense from a brogressive. I’d previously only heard it from conservatives and libertarians.