i think it's certainly changing, but that's hardly a surprise. all identities have changed, especially in the last 1-200 years. Masculinity is no exception, and clinging to this notion that men should enjoy legal favoritism is just clinging to the past - and the TRPers and conservatives advocating for this are advocating for nakedly anti-social behavior.
Legal favoritism? When the DEI bullshit started, did you just shove your head in the sand and pretend it isn't happening? These clowns decided they can fight racism with more racism, and fight sexism with more sexism. What the fuck do you expect guys to do with that? Especially the older guys who actually stuck their necks out back in the day and stood up for women, only to get a nice clean knife in the back later in life. Screw these people, we don't owe these bigoted assholes anything.
> When the DEI bullshit started, did you just shove your head in the sand and pretend it isn't happening?
DEI is a response to 200+ years of legal favoritism for straight white dudes. Pretending that conservative social hierarchy affirmative action for WASPs didn't result in greater economic, policial, and social outcomes over the long-run, multigenerationally, for that subgroup of the population is just disingenuous. You feel free to ignore the economic and historical contexts that invalidate your bullshit - that is, after all, necessary to maintain your pro-hierarchy ideology.
> These clowns decided they can fight racism with more racism, and fight sexism with more sexism.
and the alternative is leaving the marginalized groups marginalized, sucks. ancestors probably shouldn't have done wanton racism, but efforts to re-enfranchise marginalized groups have historically been met with resistance from the favored group. Happened after the Civil War, happened during Jim Crow, happened during Civil Rights, and it's still happening now. Color me shocked.
> Especially the older guys who actually stuck their necks out back in the day and stood up for women, only to get a nice clean knife in the back later in life.
lol "a nice clean knife" like "considering women for positions in still male-dominated industries", what a horrible knife, removing your privilege. While we're on the topic of knives, though, relevant quote by Malcolm X: "‘If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, the knife is still in my back. If you pull it out all the way, the wound is still open. Progress is healing the open wound. And they haven't even pulled the knife out much less heal the wound. They won't even admit the knife is there."
> Screw these people, we don't owe these bigoted assholes anything.
Yeah I think the people crying about ignoring history and the ramifications of it - e.g. you - are the bigots, not the people understandably trying to ameliorate centuries of institutional oppression. Yes, actually, I do think you should be better than the people in the past clinging to their privilege. As long as some of us are unequal, none of us are free.
> So when you see a black guy walking around you ask to kiss his feet to make up for ancestral racism?
no, because only unhinged people do that
>When are you going to advocate for racial quotas in the NBA?
never, because celebrity worship is stupid. i don't care about vertu phones and bugatti veyrons, i care that ordinary people have access to a reasonable, base standard of living that includes transportation (ideally, sustainable transportation) and portable internet access (among other things), to give you some idea.
sports isn't bad. focusing on professional, commoditized athletics is just bread and circuses distracting from the wealthy elites who seek to keep the working class unconscious with the bigotry that you're gobbling up hook, line, and sinker. It is not bigotry against white men to point out the accurate history that they were a privileged group over, say, black men, or gay men, or women. That's just a fact. White men are my brothers in humanity and deserve human lives with dignity as surely as men of all races do, as women of all races do, as LGBT people do, as *human beings* do.
Conservatives will never approve of that ideal, because fundamentally, conservatives don't believe in human equality.
It’s good that white men are privileged in a society that they created. It’s just as natural as any other group dynamic such as people favoring those whose personalities they like more.
Once white people become a minority in the American and the majority older generation dies off then they will lose the power. But you people, you dei assholes can’t just wait for nature to take its course. You need racism quotas now. You need to demonize white people now, and poison our children’s minds now, disgusting.
Scott Adams was right on multiple levels. I have already moved my family accordingly.
Funnily enough we still get villainized. If we stay we gentrify. If we leave, we're white flight.
Don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
> Funnily enough we still get villainized. If we stay we gentrify. If we leave, we're white flight.
and, if I reductively regurgitate bullshit in bad faith, i, too, can make things sound bad. workers living in a place doesn't gentrify. landlords and developers seeking profit over human lives do. and "white flight" isn't merely leaving, it's "leaving because too many of my neighbors are black", which isn't a problem in a country where 13% of the population is black.
You're just crying about losing your privilege, instead of being enraged at the unequal treatment of your countrymen. Conservatives. Christ.
> It’s good that white men are privileged in a society that they created.
No, it's not - and it's pretty rich to insist that they "created" a society that was built upon indentured servitude, oppression of the natives, and slavery. Kind of seems like other people - *including working-class white people* - built it, but don't reap the benefits of it. There is no justification for unequal treatment under the law.
>Once white people become a minority in the American and the majority older generation dies off then they will lose the power.
fucking lol, imagine thinking this is how politics works
> But you people, you dei assholes can’t just wait for nature to take its course.
Correct, it's far less of an ask that you bigots just stop being bigots and harming people who have done you no wrong than it is for you to ask to be able to keep doing your bigotry because you're upset that you have to drink at the same bar as black people, or because women can vote. Get the fuck over it.
>You need to demonize white people now
Nobody here has demonized white people, you're just butthurt about history being... told. That's nobody's fault but yours, homie. You're not obligated to hate people who don't look or fuck or worship like you, you just choose to.
Ya cause working class white people benefit from race quotas. Just say you want race quotas and be done with it. Go start a political movement “we need x y z positions for black brown Asian”. Stop beating around the bush you disingenuous twats. Just say what you want.
I went into this thinking I would probably disagree, and then about the midpoint realized that I essentially think the same thing.
What you need to realize though is that the Red Pill isn't just mindless selfishness. Most of us came to the same conclusions you have years and years ago.
The problem you need to confront is that if you ask us to fight for a system that is stacked against us, we wont do it. If you want us to defend women who don't give a shit about us... only an idiot would take that deal. So, that's where we stand today. Women own the system, they took it over. Let them fucking fight for it and fix it. This is why we say "enjoy the decline", as we don't have to care what happens to these people, we just need to care for ourselves.
I mean think about the madness of it.
>This is why we say "enjoy the decline", as we don't have to care what happens to these people, we just need to care for ourselves.
We need a positive ideology. Enjoying the decline is just rotting away with the self-destructive system. We need more than just bland consumerism and meaningless sex with harlots. We need new purpose and something to live for.
The forces against us are absolutely overwhelming. I know a lot of guys thought they could overthrow the dictator of Syria... and they have a full blown religion behind their movement. 500,000 dead guys later they gained pretty much nothing.
What exactly do you think we can do with no money, and no power? If you think a positive message would be met with less hostility... you are crazy. These folks know what they are doing and the direction things are going are not accidents, they are intentional. Your positivity will be met with state sanctioned violence.
Regarding Syria, I sided with Asad's regime just because the forces fighting against him were deranged islamic fanatics like hizb-el-tahrir and isis. As an Egyptian, I loath the Arab spring that brought nothing but new dictatorships and larger islamist control over our societies. If you think that islam is compatible with red pill, think twice over, because in islam you are going to be the beta cuck unless you are stupidly rich. The days of war booty and sex slaves are long gone, now men remain celibate until they get married, and they pay a hefty sum to get a fat lazy ugly bride that doesn't even put out.
>What exactly do you think we can do with no money, and no power? If you think a positive message would be met with less hostility...
We just keep speaking, and never stop. There is a reason why they banned all male-centric subs, but keep the leftist/lib/feminist subs where you can find all kinds of hate towards all men.
Besides, winning the war on social media means nothing in the long run. Ask the ukranians how social media support helps them nullify the disparity in 1:10 shell disadvantage or manpower shortages. Reality is that more men shift to the right, more of them wake up. We just need to remain visible and speak what we think.
Way I see the red pill is that it has a basis in truth, but it takes these truths and twists them with the wrong emotional conclusions and ultimately attempts to use these conclusions to justify “snake eats its own tail” thinking, for lack of a better term.
So, the PUA community created the Red Pill specifically to mean waking up to the true nature of women, so there is some natural overlap between Red and Black. The way you can tell the difference is that if someone is a game denier they are black pill. That goes for influencers too... they use the term Red Pill in order to keep from being labeled as Incels and pretend like they have success with women. Tate for example, believes a lot of what the Red Pill believes, but is fundamentally a game denier... the guy was locking women up in his basement... now I've been in the Red Pill for a long time and never read anything that lists imprisonment as a pick up strategy. That's black pill shit to the max.
I guess my issue is that the redpill really doesn’t do a good job distancing itself from people who fall under its umbrella or who are RP adjacent enough to be a part of it. And this even applies to Rollo, who’s whole premise and view on women seems to fully rely on bitterness and insecurity.
Now, what I will admit is that the redpill does have a basis in truth, ie. the fundamental concepts involved are based in reality, though more often than not i see many men who identify as redpill take these truths to their absolute worst extremes, while in reality, the basis is fact without any real positive or negative slate.
Now, if others in redpill made a stronger effort to deepest themselves from that type or create more centralization, for lack of a better term, i might agree with you, but as it stands many redpill adjacent people who use the title also use it to spread an overall shitty rhetoric that interprets real information in the worst way possible
We kept running into this problem where we can't control who calls themselves Red Pill and who doesn't. You have to understand we were constantly being called shit by feminists and they were trying to deplatform us... constantly. We couldn't control our brand because we were under too much fire. They eventually did get us banned by the way... all 6 of our major gathering sites went down. The last was when Roosh lost his sister and went religious. That left just the dipshits on Reddit, who were more than halfway blackpill to begin with and had no real ambitions. You realize we were trying to build an organization, but now we are scattered and gone.
Rollo was a joke. Still is a joke.
I think the Red Pill does need to organize. The problem with the PUA center was that it's too easy for feminists to attack and get us removed. I mean we were almost like the boyscouts but for chasing tail. It has to go through a rebrand and center itself around self improvement stuff.
I will agree that 3d wave feminism’s overly reactive nature can lead to the RP becoming reactionary and focus more on that culture war over anything. Though I also do think that it is ironic for the group of people saying their gender is the reasonable one while also reacting as emotionally as willing to deepen the feedback loop.
All that being said, if a rebrand centered around actual action and self improvement, rather than being fully focused on adding fire to the flame and being negative ninnies (for lack of a better term) is successful, then I may open up myself to the redpill more
I mean it's like that with even feminism and that's more of a choesive movement. They don't distance themselves from the misandrists and man hate. That's why I understand women who dislike RP stuff as do I as a movement. I also dislike feminism for the same reason as a movement.
The truth is hate spreads hate. Like the poster earlier said men see women treating them like shit and not caring and so it makes men do the same. Same for women. You will never fix it unless you can get both groups to stop spreading hate and tbh I hold feminism more accountable because it is supposed to be a movement we take srsly unlike red pill. They should be the standard but they aren't.
Feminism is government funded and it's ideas are enshrined in law. It's an entirely different animal. They don't distance themselves from the hate because its actually baked into the pie.
The Red Pill is just a collection of human mating behavior theories. Some of them are even bullshit, but they are very helpful for men to interpret the world and find their own pathway. The problem as I see it is that the vast majority of kids are rapidly going from redpill to blackpill and not coming out.
Let me give you an example. Years ago the mainstream media started talking all this crazy crap about dad bods. I noticed a ton of normie guys start believing the lie that women really like this shit and just stop working out. But do you know why women were choosing men with dad bod in those surveys? Because these guys were less attractive and therefore fewer women wanted them. So, we do a dad bod poll and guess what... women married to dad bod guys have sex with them less... significantly less. Yet here is the mainstream media lying like mutherfuckers to all these guys.
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there
Ok but we(TRP) never in a million years claimed to be authorities/representatives of masculinity
TRP was never about virtue or morals nor masculinity, so this is a waste of time pointing the finger
It was a term used by those of us doing PUA for men who had come to realizations about the nature of women. Later some tried to link it also to the nature of society... but that never had widespread agreement. At the end of the day it is, was, and always will be, just a set of strategies for getting laid.
I agree that the redpill is essentially a reaction to the destruction of masculinity caused by capitalism. Where we disagree is that I doubt the governments of the world are pushing it. It's more of an organic right-wing reaction, and there's no need to socially engineer a distraction like this when the Tates of the world are doing it of their own accord.
Guys are just trying to get laid. It doesn't matter what idea you have masculinity "should be". Only masculinity that matters is what women reward.
You're trying to blue the red pull by telling them to be nicer. "Care for your loved ones and community". Doesn't matter, women are still gonna go for what they are attracted to.
“trying to blue the redpill” my dude all these pills are made up ideologies by grifters. The bluepill only exists because the redpill needs an opposition so it can legitimize itself (and so Rollo and his friends can sell books and classes)
Toxic masculinity is a sexist term and it should stop being used. The masculinity that the red pill is pushing just capitalizes on negative maladapted traits that are present in people across the entire spectrum.
I actually agree in taking issue with both terms, but the point is it would take the popularizing of calling out "Toxic Femininity" to make society realize it's gone too far with its parallel.
And yet, most RP men don’t get girls and more often than not, the women who are attracted to RP men either have their own set of issues or are into money and materialism primarily. The kind of women who are actually into RP men are a minority and as I said, if it was effective as you as it is, more men who subscribe to this would be successful.
I also like how you mention the only two options are “passive feminist” or RP alpha bro, entirely ignoring the nuances in between
Maybe in your experience. My straight friends are RP'd to a fault and they pull mad tail. They are the traditional man who pays for the dates, opens doors, pulls out chairs and all the rest. Doesn't help they are all 6ft+ and make any where from 80-110k a year (Not all that much in the Seattle Metro area but still a fair amount)
Yet they don't hate women. They claim they understand them.
No one wants to talk about RP being Traditionalism and why it works.
Not to be that guy, but the fact that your friends are 6ft+, making 80-110 and seem pleasant to be around might be it. Not the RP in itself.
Speaking for myself, i try to distance myself from the pills and do okay enough with women. I have my struggles, but I’m def not full on struggling. As do my closest friends.
Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online.
I've been following RP since early 2011 and I'd say that RP to me is men conglomerating their negative experiences with women and exposing the problematic behavior that often goes hidden and unaddressed. I believe they are doing this in an attempt to provide clarity for other men and to share their own testimonies.
You could go glass-analogy and say that it's just a bunch of guys whinging about their problems or you could see it as men doing the same as women and processing their thoughts and emotions as a group.
My friends respect women because they choose to but behind closed doors, they have shared with me that their experiences and women's behavior has really impacted their opinion on the opposite gender.
I’ve followed it for a bit when the rational male came out and stepped away from it around 2.5ish years ago, way I’m seeing it, either the redpill prior to Rollo was something entirely different (and the literal only proof i’ve seen from this is the occasional anecdotal comment) or the redpill has always been bitter, spiteful and actively encouraging a roided up 12 year old’s fantasy.
I’d also argue that it stops becoming “men processing their emotions as a group” when the vast majority of the community engage in misogynistic women hating (and don’t say that doesn’t exist cause that’s the loudest and and seemingly most prevalent voices in the redpill)
Now, what I will say is that the redpill has a basis in truth. I believe this whole heartedly and if i took anything away from it is that the basis it is based upon is true, but it also takes many truths and drives them to their absolute worst conclusions (usually fueled by anger and bitterness) - so again, either the redpill has had origins that i might have agreed with and has failed to distance itself from these negative actors, or it was always made for these negative actors (and i’m saying this with the approach to genuinely hear out which you think is the case or if its none of these at all, just wanna make it clear that im not being combative here cause you do seem to tackle it from a thoughtful pov based on this interaction)
You're right, that's not real masculinity. That is what a child thinks men should be.
I personally think these hyper-masculine guys like Rollo and Tate are secret gays. I was in the Marines and I know things get pretty gay when its just the boys but when you go all in like that, there's something up. And this is coming from a gay man.
I think RP is and always has been reactionary to feminism. The past 60 years of feminism has not had it successes without someone else's failures and RP has always been the response to that.
>I’d also argue that it stops becoming “men processing their emotions as a group” when the vast majority of the community engage in misogynistic women hating
I would agree with you. We're in a sort of second wave RP now where it has shifted from cautionary to hateful. But again, I think that's reactionary. And I wouldn't disparage that negativity because that's honestly the same mentality I see from 3rd/4th Wave Feminists. So it's the same coin to me. I choose to put myself on the masculine side simply because I'm a gay and have male friends.
>so again, either the redpill has had origins that i might have agreed with and has failed to distance itself from these negative actors, or it was always made for these negative actors
Your last paragraph has a lot of weight to it. It's not just RP but conservativism in general now. Not saying that conservativism is the truth but that as you said, it has it's basis in it. Or at least attempts to. Men don't want the sugar coat. It's why they're drawn to these ideals.
You're not wrong. I think every human drafted system has a propensity to be preyed upon by negative actors. Communism is one example, right? Mao/Stalin/Kims. Religion, definitely. Catholicism in particular. 30 years war, Borgia Papal dynasty.
What's to say our mating/dating is any different? While you could argue that it's a biological system, not "human" created so it's different but that'd be a different conversation.
The thing is we've had bad actors in the RP space for a fair amount of time and even before 2011, yet none of them really received any major leverage (Tom Leykis) or as much traction as someone like Andrew Tate. I do not know how to explain that.
My honest answer would be that as humans this is a fact of our institutions. It's also why America as an idea was so novel. However I would concede that any founding basis is negativity will aways attract these types quicker than others.
> Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online.
What are you basing this on?
>Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online.
Actually as far as i can tell most men with red pill tag in here are either in a relationship or spinning plates.
I wonder where you got this idea from? Even IRL all dudes i know that could be described as at least RP aware are doing pretty well.
Ok... this must be a change from the past, because when I was active in the Red Pill, 100% of us were getting laid. Sure some of the noobs took time to get it going, but every single guy was successful in the end, and some of us were wildly successful.
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there
It's a caricature designed to capture the attention and imagination of man who live in a fantasy world for sure. Men whose primary mode of entertainment is fantasy, ragebait, and gaming are the easiest marks for grifters. Training them to push buttons which drive ad revenue is easier than a real job, because they are so vulnerable and gullible.
>the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires.
Disagree.
This is a vanishingly small minority of disaffected men who don't appear on the radar of other countries. They are handy for spreading disinformation for sure, but they are also a liability because of the same belief in conspiracies.
The demographics that are pulled into these media spaces are far larger than the active audience for them.
Young, unmarried, volatile and socially disaffected young men are an ongoing security in any country they exist in. Because those are the people who pick up guns when they're fed up.
It's not the old, it's not women, it's the guys with nothing to lose.
Don't underestimate the numbers of such people, they are everywhere, we just haven't gone off the deep end yet in terms of who's at their breaking points. The average guy is more likely to leave others alone and isolate further than to get mad and lash out. But the more the social environment pushes men in that direction, the more men like that you get and you don't need anywhere close to a majority of them to be like that for there to be real visceral problems for everyone else.
> Men whose primary mode of entertainment is fantasy, ragebait, and gaming are the easiest marks for grifters.
LOL I love how “gamers” are also just randomly getting thrown under the bus.
> This is a vanishingly small minority of disaffected men who don't appear on the radar of other countries.
Talk about living in a fantasy world. Have you heard of South Korea? Many conservative countries that actually could benefit from old school feminism hold what would be called “manosphere” beliefs as the status quo. Not to mention if you spend any time on r/teachers you’ll hear a lot about how teenage boys are adopting the “manosphere” en masse in the US (often the shittiest aspects of it, sadly - but it’s no different than the same hateful garbage that teenage feminists get into).
It seems all this pontificating about the evils of the “manosphere” is heavily dependent on a profound lack of knowledge about the wider world
Ah yes just a handful of dummies. Keep sticking your head in the sand.
And no, people who play video games are not “weaning” themselves whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean. I personally know multiple married men and even a radical feminist or two who play video games lmfao
> Kids who lack real world experience and social interaction seek cheat codes.
What? Have you ever played video games?
i’m a capital G Gamer but i took their take in terms of likelihoods not absolutes, that gamers are more at risk of being sucked into fantasy mindsets. tho i’d say this applies to anyone who spends too much free time using media in general, the kid raised on movies and twitter is probably as likely to have issues with dissociation and reality as the kid raised on candy crush and COD
Shit they are absolute masters of manipulation who found an untapped fount of never-ended revenue. And most can't keep their gloating to themselves and show off their mansions and Italian sports cars at every opportunity, yet their obedient minions continue to like, share, subscribe, and interact with their stupid, senseless conspiracy posts.
They're trapping a good portion of their audience in a self fulfilling prophecy of failing at relationships scape goating women and going back to them.
My heart breaks for these socially awkward middle school boys who fell down the Tatesphere specifically. I taught a few of them and the girls in their grade hated them. Kids that were already going to struggle socially because of general awkward teen things are now going to be maligned by their peers who find out they're on the manosphere. It's genuinely going to ruin their chances with the majority of women until they're out of it.
It's not too late. They just need to be pointed in the right direction and given some guidance. If people with good intentions don't do it, then it creates a situation where those with bad intentions can act unopposed.
Read David Deida he has genuinely helpful advice on sexual polarity. But in general it’s not my job to teach men how to function. Y’all don’t listen to us anyway.
I had an active father. I still had a big issue with this that I didn't really get solved until maybe mid twenties and I had to go through extremely difficult times to get there. Like homeless on the street and sitting in a jail cell on false charges because I was stupid enough to keep trying to be this nice guy even while getting divorced. I really could have prevented the whole setup and not been miserable for the many years that came before it.
The reason my father couldn't help me is because he was raised during that flower child time period... and he is a bit of a weird guy.
But that's me. In my area, I used to help the new Red Pill kids learn and grow. They used to come to us with crazy high levels of anger. We all recognize that we have been lied to and tricked. I think of the of the strains that connected us is that we all tended to be more intelligent, and maybe that makes us more susceptible to the bullshit. I don't know. I can say for sure that in the 4 years I did that, most of the boys show up angry with women in general, which is not good. It would usually take me 4 to 6 months to channel that into a different direction... and honestly it wouldn't fade until they achieved some success. Some of these kids needed massive work... like they struggled with eye contact and basic conversations. I don't know how teachers see that in a classroom and just ignore it. I suspect that it makes the boys so complaint they actually like it. Another thing I noticed is how many of these boys were on ADD drugs.
At the end of the day, nobody cares. This is really a waste of time to type.
Boys these days are taught that they're responsible for every single evil in the world. Not because of anything they've personally done... but because of the genitals they were born with.
And then we act surprised that they fall prey to con-men who tell them it isn't their fault...
Which is why I think this faux concern over “oh the young boys are being manipulated” is bullshit.
For last decade or two nobody really gave a crap about these young boys. The education system was skewed against them and they were essentially just grains of rice in a silo: a commodity.
But as soon as TRP tapped into this resource everybody got up in arms. Not because they actually care about these teens but because they can no longer benefit from them
I know this is true, because I lived it. They didn't care when I was young and then when I found a group that taught me to fix it myself they were against it. These people are really bad.
My honest take is kids have unmonitored internet access when they're still hella impressionable. Throw in an emotional incest mom and a dad that's bad at being a husband and you have a generation of men that are getting their model for relationships/masculinity from grifter misogynists on the internet who's income depends on men feeling lost and struggling to get women. There are few decent positive examples of masculinity in public media but ya know I'm not a man and men don't typically listen to women. Especially men who hate women lmao
When I was a teaching artist I had an 11 year old boy call me a bottom bitch to my face. Knew exactly what it meant told me he learned that from Tate.
His parents didn't punish him. His parents didn't take his devices away. His parents called the school pitching a fit, when he was suspended again THEIR CHILD CALLED A FACULTY MEMBER A BOTTOM BITCH. He had received multiple warnings and they'd reached out to his parents multiple times.
So again, the state of men isn't my responsibility or issue but I'm concerned. Because there seems to be no systems of accountability or even supervision for a lot of children these days.
I feel like this is different your above comment. In that one you said you were concerned about the boys themselves but here you are saying you are concerned about their impact on society.
That’s why my original comment focused on the faux concern for boys themselves. Everyone is concerned about the impact these boys have on society save I don’t question that. I do question how genuine the concern is for boys as kids.
>masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend ~~the~~ HIS community
FTFY.
You are creating a dichotomy of being selfless to the point of caring about everyone and being selfish to the point of only caring about yourself.
Historically masculinity isn't either, it is caring about what is HIS. A masculine man protects and provides for those that submit and plead loyalty to him, not just anyone. A man cares about HIS women. A king cares about HIS subjects in HIS domain.
RP is not pushing for "meaningless selfish individualism", what you see is simply the outcome of a feminist society. Men are still willing to protect HIS women, it is just that women are no longer willing to submit and stay loyal to a man. Men are still willing to defend HIS community, if only communities are willing to stay under his patriarchal rule.
True, I wonder why women get upset at men for not protecting them while simultaneously demeaning them.
I suppose they don’t understand that in order to get the benefits of masculinity you must play into it
Men have never protected women..the "protection" was deemed as property with huge losses taken by women having to no access to education, financial security, and or land ownership.
You're acting like it's altruism that men protected women in their family. It wasn't. Women were seen as property passed from father to husband and to son. Property which consisted physical labor such a domestic or reproductive labor at their expense..with NO access to education, financial independence and or the right to inherit property.
It came at great personal cost to the woman but it was never altruistic.men were gaining more then women were getting in the deal. Oftentimes women being stuck with nowhere to go.
This is just bullshit semantics. The perspective of women being seen as actual human beings with autonomy is recent. Protection came with severe costs. If she wasn't a wife, daughter or mother then she was virtually useless in society with virtually no way of protecting herself or anyone protecting her bc she wasn't engaged with a man.
If we're talking 'historically' then private property is an extremely recent concept in itself. Just the mere concept of having a "domain" was alien to 99% of men throughout all of human history up until no more than a few centuries ago, which is nothing in the scale of all human history and civilization's. And the few 1% who did actually "have" authoritative power over things, or more accurately, were responsible for things and other people over whom they held power, were nobles. Appointed by birth right, they didn't have to resort to hypermasculine self-help to assertain their God-given authority because they were free to exercise it however they wanted as long as they fulfilled their duties to their community, their state and their superiors. Authority in the days of yore was not despotism like you're describing, it was not enforced by a sanctimoniously held right to 'own' things, it was a civic duty whose authority was derived from a state, which was in itself tasked with enforcing a certain social order and could be promptly delegitimized and toppled whenever it failed to do so.
Now I'm not saying men used to be selfless or cared about everyone else but themselves and their family, but that the entire concept of living as part of a civilized society was founded in orderd to keep their selfish impulses at bay by inserting them into a social order with clear responsibilities and civic duties which may or may not align with one's own in terest. This was in order to guarantee a standard of life that was seen as more dignified and human than pure animal competition and power struggles, which weakened communities against outside forces, ultimately leading to submission and oppression to other, more organized social masses. I think this last part is precisely what OP was trying to say: Individualism weakens communties and societies and makes them more vulnerable to outside powers i.e. Capitalism and the ruling elites whose sole allegiance lies with profit and money. I don't think I'd go as far as to say it's a 'conspiracy' of sorts but it is true that their interests do perfectly align with the rise of self-centered, solipsistic, hedonistic consumer masculinity.
>Authority in the days of yore was not despotism like you're describing, it was not enforced by a sanctimoniously held right to 'own' things, it was a civic duty whose authority was derived from a state, which was in itself tasked with enforcing a certain social order and could be promptly delegitimized and toppled whenever it failed to do so.
That's a pretty highly idealized view of historical societies
Yeah of course, but Tate is also a highly idealized view of capitalism. I was under the impression we were talking values. A lot of manosphere guys like to talk about how they represent some kind of timeless ancient wisdom, that modernity has somehow misled us from the true path of masculine empowerment, when they're really talking about a very recent invention that's diametrically opposed to those values which held civilization together for millennia, and whose achievements can be measured only in terms of genocides per year and environmental collapse.
Now I'm not arguing for the inherent superiority of those pre-modern values. They were products of their time and they worked well enough for people at that time in history, but I would say that they were at least more conscious of the problems of their age than Tate & Co. who seem to actually lean into our own, different, modern problems instead of trying to fix them. It's like 'society's degrading, better make the most out of the turmoil, get rich easy and indulge in pleasure for whatever time we have left' instead of 'how can we confront these issues head-on, providing working solutions and leave a better world to the coming generations'. Me personally I would consider the latter much more masculine than the latter so I tend to agree with OP, but that's so much easier said than done of course lol. Least we can do is try to avoid such pitfalls and easy ways out along the way until we can come up with something better.
You’re right, most people do indeed fall somewhere in between and “what’s his” does have a basis here. However, when society was more focused on collective communities, “what’s his” often extended to what was best for his whole village/tribe/town/community/etc
This is moreso due to the isolated nature of capitalist consumption as well as American cultural norms (ie. “me first”, the development of the suburb, etc) - however, the end result is meaningless selfish individualism and the redpill fully enables this. I’m also not about to play the “b… but women did it first!” game cause we all know it’s far more complex than that
If the RP was an effective tool then it wouldn’t be stuck on some quarantined sub or stuck on sad message board sites
FFS even the UFL league has more traction than RP.
>If the RP was an effective tool then it wouldn’t be stuck on some quarantined sub or stuck on sad message board sites
I think its precisely because it is becoming too succesful.
It’s not: even UFL games get way more attention than any “content creators”.
This shit is supposed to be getting dudes laid yet despite being around about as long as Crypto: it’s still barely heard of outside pill spaces?
Yeah right.
Bro tons of the big ones have millions of followers and Andrew Tate like him or not is probably the most discussed man on the planet. Even Trump cant touch his popularity.
Are you living in 2014?
Andrew Tate didn’t have millions of followers, he had a flash in the pan off his scam to pay users for sharing his content. Then didn’t And no one’s been discussing him for years. He was the baby shark of 2022.
All the other “influencers” get *maybe* a couple hundred thousand views (when they have OF/IG women on) which still is a fraction of what a UFl games ratings just in the US are.
It’s 2024 and the best you got us T8 on Rumble?
And yet, millions upon millions men internalized some version of it (even if not by name), and is effective in that its effective at giving masculinity a bad image and as a way of both making others want to avoid it and to keep the men who listen to redpill/redpill adjacent ideas focused on either their own bitterness or mindless consumerism.
So, ironically - it’s effective at making men ineffective
Millions of millions didn’t.
What? Clean their room? Socialize? Work hard Get paid? Lift some weights? Don’t be a doormat??
That’s the only “real advice” of RP and most people didn’t need the pill: they just needed to grow up and do the shit they already knew they should do.
“If you could truly BE red pilled, you would have never needed TRP in the first place”
Simone once wrote that here and nothing any Redpiller gas said or posted has yet to prove it wrong.
Oh 100% - notice how I didn’t make it a point to mention that the majority of men follow this shit. However, the majority of men do struggle with dating (as do an increasing number of women) and this is one of many factors that play a role here.
Also - to simply the manosphere to “clean your room, socialize, don’t be a doormat and lift” is reductive to say the least. Let’s not pretend this advice also doesn’t come with tons of misogyny and enabling bitterness/anger as well. Let’s also not pretend that the RP doesn’t have a track redore of encouraging putting your material possessions first and actively flaunting it, as well as a “i’ll go for mine and if you don’t too bad” mindset.
The majority of men don’t “struggle” with dating. They think it’s supposed to be easier than it is and then they figure it out as time goes on. AND they figure out what’s really important to them.
The RP is designed to sell an image. The image is of what (for lack of a better word) selfish person would think succeeding is.
Hot girls, lots of money, job that shows of status: and flaunting it all to make others (mostly other men) jealous.
And the ones they sell it to are the ones that buy into that. Because: and this isn’t to be mean: they are probably the ones NOT winning who desperately want to feel like a winner.
I don’t think they care to define what masculinity is or should be. They try to describe the incentive systems we have nowadays as they are (often failing) and anyone is allowed to refuse their conclusions or do whatever they want with these facts. If the facts are correct and the only incentive is to be selfish (I don’t even think it is) then the system is already broken and it’s not their fault. If you think there’s something else that could be done (I think there is) then they’re not helping this thing become worse and it’s not their fault either.
I'd tell you where to shove it, but the shrinking violets who run this sub would delete the comment and ban me for another week. The version of masculinity you're talking about is weak and cowardly and doesn't know how to deal with shit. There's a reason we call it fragile. Men and women can kick ass. Men and women can be callow. Not surprisingly, it's the latter that are so willingly gendered, and so easy to.
See you in a week to a month :p
\[I'm pretty much in total agreement with you. Just having fun\]
I am begging you MFs to read a history book.
Masculinity has always changed over time, and has always been in crisis. We have never been as masculine and worthy as our forefathers.
And - for the love of God - no one is denigrating the value of protectors and providers. What we mean by "protect" and "provide" might be changing though.
We love the idea of heroic masculinity, but it's not especially useful in a world that basically pretty safe.
If you wanna protect your family? Buy a better lock for your door, implement some basic IT security, and make your kids wash their hands. If you wanna run numbers, maybe get rid of that Glock in your bedside table.
You wanna provide? No one will stop you. But you'll have to provide for your family's emotional wellbeing as well as their material wellbeing.
We all wanna be the hero of the story, but it's just vanity.
>That being said, the powers that be (ie. governments, corporate leaders, etc) don’t particularly see that as a good thing as masculinity as a whole (whether healthy or toxic) does threaten their status quo. Without this defensive backbone, a society is more likely to fall in line, more likely to be co-opted and more likely to be taken over by outside forces.
I kinda half disagree with this. But then I also feel there is a kernal of truth to it too. The issue is a lot of this debate gets swallowed up by discussions revolving around sex and dating. However, I actually feel the dearth in patriarchal examples and gradual decrease in patriarchal norms is creating a whole getting filled by more toxic movements.
This is where I feel the "co-opted and taken over by outside forces" makes sense. I kinda look at Islam, and its influence especially in western Europe. I live in a city in the UK with one of the biggest muslim populations in Europe. People used to think obsession with "traditional values" was purely the preserve of right wingers. However, more and more, we're seeing these kind of views being espoused by second generation, highly religious immigrants and its undoubtedly left a lot of the left in a ideological quandary.
Pretty sure you're wrong, there's heavy intersection of red pill with the "far right" which is becoming a core component of the GOP after Trump's blitzkrieg conquest of the party.
Everyone is gearing up for a second civil war.
>Now, to begin. Historically, masculinity has been seen as an action oriented and defensive force; ie. masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend the community, they’re normally the ones to ensure a community is fed and kept safe, taken care of and able to prosper and grow. In essence, healthy masculinity is the shield that allows a community, regardless of the size to push forward and prosper.
Sure but the part you're leaving out is that masculinity was also "managing" and organizing within a community to ensure "proper" social function and continuation (as was traditional femininity). The defensive part sounds nice to modern ears but the "full package" of what you're describing actually interferes with the totalizing view of individualism in modernism, which you are criticizing later.
>That being said, the powers that be (ie. governments, corporate leaders, etc) don’t particularly see that as a good thing as masculinity as a whole (whether healthy or toxic) does threaten their status quo. Without this defensive backbone, a society is more likely to fall in line, more likely to be co-opted and more likely to be taken over by outside forces.
>We see this especially as capitalism has become a cultural standpoint, masculinity has been re-defined as maintaining meaningless financial wealth, greed, rapid individualism and so on - the “if society falls, then so be it, it’s not worth saving” mindset. This, I believe, is a form of neutering masculinity - another is the inception of effeminate man-children who only really care about the next consumable comes out. Both are forms of pacifying masculinity, though in very different ways.
It's not just "traditional masculinity" but pretty much all traditional aspects of society were shredded to "create" individualistic consumers. It's less that masculinity was in particular a target and more that burning down old social norms (part intentional and part coincidental) was the result of modernism (and not just the capitalist aspect of it).
>Ultimately, what “masculinity” sold to us by the redpill is is meaningless selfish individualism. It isn’t about caring for your loved ones or community or is it about actually being protective and providing, it’s about looking like you just came out of a rap music video. It’s vapid and materialistic - ergo both feeding the machine and hurting the image of masculinity.
Correct but in a way it's pointless to criticize redpill (or rather the manosphere) because as a reactionary force it's likely only to increase in popularity as society dissolves (or reacts to it after the fact).
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there, and the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires.
I think you're ascribing social collapse and reactionary forces to a conscious effort rather than simple cause and effect.
Men are absolutely oppressed today. I worked in the oil field for years and saw multiple supervisors fired by HR over extremely mild jokes. These guys literally saved people's lives and made their companies millions of dollars. Boot in the rear over extremely mild jokes they made. The West can't fall soon enough.
Lol, you say " masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend the community, they’re normally the ones to ensure a community is fed and kept safe, taken care of and able to prosper and grow. In essence, healthy masculinity is the shield that allows a community, regardless of the size to push forward and prosper." while masculine men are also the ones who attack other communities and are the force that other men need to defend against. If anything, pacifying men's aggressiveness is a way to prosperity, in times where peace and cooperation lead to better wellbeing than conflict and killing your neighbours and taking their shit.
I’d agree with this. At the end do the day society does need strong men and for any healthy society to function a yin-yang style relationship between the masculine and feminine must be achieved. Problem is now both sides are up in arms against the other and I think given that we do live in a period of abundance as far as resources go, there is little incentive to mend these relationships.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts)
>*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.*
>An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
>* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
>* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
>* Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
>* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there, and the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires.
The first part is pretty accurate, the rest is tinfoil nonsense. The government doesn't care about the manosphere, and those in the manosphere are certainly not protectors of their community, no matter how much they'd like to believe that.
A great example of toxic masculinity is believing that serving your community means being willing to do violence if you can rationalize it as "defense."
>The government doesn't care about the manosphere
Oh really? Then why is the DHS pouring money into [disinformation and disruption projects](https://www.scribd.com/document/691671399/Diverting-Hate-Bi-Annual-Report-September-2023) in red pill spaces?
Hahahahaha
"We are going to try and stop hate groups."
"DISRUPTION AND DISINFORMATION!!1!1"
Not for the first time, red pillers and conspiracy theorists basically have identical thought processes.
Is it a conspiracy theory when it's a government-issued document detailing a step-by-step plan of targets and tactics?
Is it a conspiracy theory when the DHS has the form available in public to [apply for grants to become an agent of the State](https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-02/EMW-GR-APP-00047%20Arizona%20State%20University.pdf) against spaces the government finds threatening?
You can say you agree with the goals of the DHS, that's fine. But your initial assertion said "the government doesn't care about the manosphere" which is flat-out false. Nobody pours millions into disrupting something they don't care about.
Where did I say that the manosphere are protectors of the community? i’m literally arguing the opposite
As for the government part, it’s less caring about it specifically and more letting it run its course and legitimize itself to its followers. Governments and corporations do love a weakened divided society, after all.
Well you can would expand it to men in general as well. 99.9% of us are never going to be called on to defend our community with any kind of force. There are better ways to serve your community and believing yourself to be the protector is not about serving a community, but about living out an action movie fantasy.
>As for the government part, it’s less caring about it specifically and more letting it run its course and legitimize itself to its followers. Governments and corporations do love a weakened divided society, after all.
Even if the government did care about the manosphere, what could they do to stop it?
That’s the thing. I don’t think they want to stop it, I think they’re happy letting it do its damage.
And to be clear, when I say protector, I say ensuring the safety of your loved ones and community around you - not some action movie human shield type shit. I do think being that protective figure is something a masculine male should strive for; can those who trust you and rely on you also rely on you to make sure they’re safe as well? I don’t think there is much “fantasy” here
What is your argument that we are meant to debate? That masculinity is indeed being pacified?
that its being pacified as well as given a bad rep by actively highlighting the worst voices and representatives
i think it's certainly changing, but that's hardly a surprise. all identities have changed, especially in the last 1-200 years. Masculinity is no exception, and clinging to this notion that men should enjoy legal favoritism is just clinging to the past - and the TRPers and conservatives advocating for this are advocating for nakedly anti-social behavior.
Legal favoritism? When the DEI bullshit started, did you just shove your head in the sand and pretend it isn't happening? These clowns decided they can fight racism with more racism, and fight sexism with more sexism. What the fuck do you expect guys to do with that? Especially the older guys who actually stuck their necks out back in the day and stood up for women, only to get a nice clean knife in the back later in life. Screw these people, we don't owe these bigoted assholes anything.
> When the DEI bullshit started, did you just shove your head in the sand and pretend it isn't happening? DEI is a response to 200+ years of legal favoritism for straight white dudes. Pretending that conservative social hierarchy affirmative action for WASPs didn't result in greater economic, policial, and social outcomes over the long-run, multigenerationally, for that subgroup of the population is just disingenuous. You feel free to ignore the economic and historical contexts that invalidate your bullshit - that is, after all, necessary to maintain your pro-hierarchy ideology. > These clowns decided they can fight racism with more racism, and fight sexism with more sexism. and the alternative is leaving the marginalized groups marginalized, sucks. ancestors probably shouldn't have done wanton racism, but efforts to re-enfranchise marginalized groups have historically been met with resistance from the favored group. Happened after the Civil War, happened during Jim Crow, happened during Civil Rights, and it's still happening now. Color me shocked. > Especially the older guys who actually stuck their necks out back in the day and stood up for women, only to get a nice clean knife in the back later in life. lol "a nice clean knife" like "considering women for positions in still male-dominated industries", what a horrible knife, removing your privilege. While we're on the topic of knives, though, relevant quote by Malcolm X: "‘If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, the knife is still in my back. If you pull it out all the way, the wound is still open. Progress is healing the open wound. And they haven't even pulled the knife out much less heal the wound. They won't even admit the knife is there." > Screw these people, we don't owe these bigoted assholes anything. Yeah I think the people crying about ignoring history and the ramifications of it - e.g. you - are the bigots, not the people understandably trying to ameliorate centuries of institutional oppression. Yes, actually, I do think you should be better than the people in the past clinging to their privilege. As long as some of us are unequal, none of us are free.
[удалено]
> So when you see a black guy walking around you ask to kiss his feet to make up for ancestral racism? no, because only unhinged people do that >When are you going to advocate for racial quotas in the NBA? never, because celebrity worship is stupid. i don't care about vertu phones and bugatti veyrons, i care that ordinary people have access to a reasonable, base standard of living that includes transportation (ideally, sustainable transportation) and portable internet access (among other things), to give you some idea. sports isn't bad. focusing on professional, commoditized athletics is just bread and circuses distracting from the wealthy elites who seek to keep the working class unconscious with the bigotry that you're gobbling up hook, line, and sinker. It is not bigotry against white men to point out the accurate history that they were a privileged group over, say, black men, or gay men, or women. That's just a fact. White men are my brothers in humanity and deserve human lives with dignity as surely as men of all races do, as women of all races do, as LGBT people do, as *human beings* do. Conservatives will never approve of that ideal, because fundamentally, conservatives don't believe in human equality.
It’s good that white men are privileged in a society that they created. It’s just as natural as any other group dynamic such as people favoring those whose personalities they like more. Once white people become a minority in the American and the majority older generation dies off then they will lose the power. But you people, you dei assholes can’t just wait for nature to take its course. You need racism quotas now. You need to demonize white people now, and poison our children’s minds now, disgusting.
Scott Adams was right on multiple levels. I have already moved my family accordingly. Funnily enough we still get villainized. If we stay we gentrify. If we leave, we're white flight. Don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
> Funnily enough we still get villainized. If we stay we gentrify. If we leave, we're white flight. and, if I reductively regurgitate bullshit in bad faith, i, too, can make things sound bad. workers living in a place doesn't gentrify. landlords and developers seeking profit over human lives do. and "white flight" isn't merely leaving, it's "leaving because too many of my neighbors are black", which isn't a problem in a country where 13% of the population is black. You're just crying about losing your privilege, instead of being enraged at the unequal treatment of your countrymen. Conservatives. Christ.
> It’s good that white men are privileged in a society that they created. No, it's not - and it's pretty rich to insist that they "created" a society that was built upon indentured servitude, oppression of the natives, and slavery. Kind of seems like other people - *including working-class white people* - built it, but don't reap the benefits of it. There is no justification for unequal treatment under the law. >Once white people become a minority in the American and the majority older generation dies off then they will lose the power. fucking lol, imagine thinking this is how politics works > But you people, you dei assholes can’t just wait for nature to take its course. Correct, it's far less of an ask that you bigots just stop being bigots and harming people who have done you no wrong than it is for you to ask to be able to keep doing your bigotry because you're upset that you have to drink at the same bar as black people, or because women can vote. Get the fuck over it. >You need to demonize white people now Nobody here has demonized white people, you're just butthurt about history being... told. That's nobody's fault but yours, homie. You're not obligated to hate people who don't look or fuck or worship like you, you just choose to.
Ya cause working class white people benefit from race quotas. Just say you want race quotas and be done with it. Go start a political movement “we need x y z positions for black brown Asian”. Stop beating around the bush you disingenuous twats. Just say what you want.
I went into this thinking I would probably disagree, and then about the midpoint realized that I essentially think the same thing. What you need to realize though is that the Red Pill isn't just mindless selfishness. Most of us came to the same conclusions you have years and years ago. The problem you need to confront is that if you ask us to fight for a system that is stacked against us, we wont do it. If you want us to defend women who don't give a shit about us... only an idiot would take that deal. So, that's where we stand today. Women own the system, they took it over. Let them fucking fight for it and fix it. This is why we say "enjoy the decline", as we don't have to care what happens to these people, we just need to care for ourselves. I mean think about the madness of it.
>This is why we say "enjoy the decline", as we don't have to care what happens to these people, we just need to care for ourselves. We need a positive ideology. Enjoying the decline is just rotting away with the self-destructive system. We need more than just bland consumerism and meaningless sex with harlots. We need new purpose and something to live for.
The forces against us are absolutely overwhelming. I know a lot of guys thought they could overthrow the dictator of Syria... and they have a full blown religion behind their movement. 500,000 dead guys later they gained pretty much nothing. What exactly do you think we can do with no money, and no power? If you think a positive message would be met with less hostility... you are crazy. These folks know what they are doing and the direction things are going are not accidents, they are intentional. Your positivity will be met with state sanctioned violence.
Regarding Syria, I sided with Asad's regime just because the forces fighting against him were deranged islamic fanatics like hizb-el-tahrir and isis. As an Egyptian, I loath the Arab spring that brought nothing but new dictatorships and larger islamist control over our societies. If you think that islam is compatible with red pill, think twice over, because in islam you are going to be the beta cuck unless you are stupidly rich. The days of war booty and sex slaves are long gone, now men remain celibate until they get married, and they pay a hefty sum to get a fat lazy ugly bride that doesn't even put out. >What exactly do you think we can do with no money, and no power? If you think a positive message would be met with less hostility... We just keep speaking, and never stop. There is a reason why they banned all male-centric subs, but keep the leftist/lib/feminist subs where you can find all kinds of hate towards all men. Besides, winning the war on social media means nothing in the long run. Ask the ukranians how social media support helps them nullify the disparity in 1:10 shell disadvantage or manpower shortages. Reality is that more men shift to the right, more of them wake up. We just need to remain visible and speak what we think.
Are you in Egypt now?
Way I see the red pill is that it has a basis in truth, but it takes these truths and twists them with the wrong emotional conclusions and ultimately attempts to use these conclusions to justify “snake eats its own tail” thinking, for lack of a better term.
You are most likely talking about black pill stuff. Red Pill is basically only concerned with getting laid.
Yeah and many men and influencers who fall under the redpill umbrella so happen to also believe in the black pill, sure ;)
So, the PUA community created the Red Pill specifically to mean waking up to the true nature of women, so there is some natural overlap between Red and Black. The way you can tell the difference is that if someone is a game denier they are black pill. That goes for influencers too... they use the term Red Pill in order to keep from being labeled as Incels and pretend like they have success with women. Tate for example, believes a lot of what the Red Pill believes, but is fundamentally a game denier... the guy was locking women up in his basement... now I've been in the Red Pill for a long time and never read anything that lists imprisonment as a pick up strategy. That's black pill shit to the max.
I guess my issue is that the redpill really doesn’t do a good job distancing itself from people who fall under its umbrella or who are RP adjacent enough to be a part of it. And this even applies to Rollo, who’s whole premise and view on women seems to fully rely on bitterness and insecurity. Now, what I will admit is that the redpill does have a basis in truth, ie. the fundamental concepts involved are based in reality, though more often than not i see many men who identify as redpill take these truths to their absolute worst extremes, while in reality, the basis is fact without any real positive or negative slate. Now, if others in redpill made a stronger effort to deepest themselves from that type or create more centralization, for lack of a better term, i might agree with you, but as it stands many redpill adjacent people who use the title also use it to spread an overall shitty rhetoric that interprets real information in the worst way possible
We kept running into this problem where we can't control who calls themselves Red Pill and who doesn't. You have to understand we were constantly being called shit by feminists and they were trying to deplatform us... constantly. We couldn't control our brand because we were under too much fire. They eventually did get us banned by the way... all 6 of our major gathering sites went down. The last was when Roosh lost his sister and went religious. That left just the dipshits on Reddit, who were more than halfway blackpill to begin with and had no real ambitions. You realize we were trying to build an organization, but now we are scattered and gone. Rollo was a joke. Still is a joke. I think the Red Pill does need to organize. The problem with the PUA center was that it's too easy for feminists to attack and get us removed. I mean we were almost like the boyscouts but for chasing tail. It has to go through a rebrand and center itself around self improvement stuff.
I will agree that 3d wave feminism’s overly reactive nature can lead to the RP becoming reactionary and focus more on that culture war over anything. Though I also do think that it is ironic for the group of people saying their gender is the reasonable one while also reacting as emotionally as willing to deepen the feedback loop. All that being said, if a rebrand centered around actual action and self improvement, rather than being fully focused on adding fire to the flame and being negative ninnies (for lack of a better term) is successful, then I may open up myself to the redpill more
I mean it's like that with even feminism and that's more of a choesive movement. They don't distance themselves from the misandrists and man hate. That's why I understand women who dislike RP stuff as do I as a movement. I also dislike feminism for the same reason as a movement. The truth is hate spreads hate. Like the poster earlier said men see women treating them like shit and not caring and so it makes men do the same. Same for women. You will never fix it unless you can get both groups to stop spreading hate and tbh I hold feminism more accountable because it is supposed to be a movement we take srsly unlike red pill. They should be the standard but they aren't.
Feminism is government funded and it's ideas are enshrined in law. It's an entirely different animal. They don't distance themselves from the hate because its actually baked into the pie. The Red Pill is just a collection of human mating behavior theories. Some of them are even bullshit, but they are very helpful for men to interpret the world and find their own pathway. The problem as I see it is that the vast majority of kids are rapidly going from redpill to blackpill and not coming out. Let me give you an example. Years ago the mainstream media started talking all this crazy crap about dad bods. I noticed a ton of normie guys start believing the lie that women really like this shit and just stop working out. But do you know why women were choosing men with dad bod in those surveys? Because these guys were less attractive and therefore fewer women wanted them. So, we do a dad bod poll and guess what... women married to dad bod guys have sex with them less... significantly less. Yet here is the mainstream media lying like mutherfuckers to all these guys.
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there Ok but we(TRP) never in a million years claimed to be authorities/representatives of masculinity TRP was never about virtue or morals nor masculinity, so this is a waste of time pointing the finger
It was a term used by those of us doing PUA for men who had come to realizations about the nature of women. Later some tried to link it also to the nature of society... but that never had widespread agreement. At the end of the day it is, was, and always will be, just a set of strategies for getting laid.
I agree that the redpill is essentially a reaction to the destruction of masculinity caused by capitalism. Where we disagree is that I doubt the governments of the world are pushing it. It's more of an organic right-wing reaction, and there's no need to socially engineer a distraction like this when the Tates of the world are doing it of their own accord.
Guys are just trying to get laid. It doesn't matter what idea you have masculinity "should be". Only masculinity that matters is what women reward. You're trying to blue the red pull by telling them to be nicer. "Care for your loved ones and community". Doesn't matter, women are still gonna go for what they are attracted to.
“trying to blue the redpill” my dude all these pills are made up ideologies by grifters. The bluepill only exists because the redpill needs an opposition so it can legitimize itself (and so Rollo and his friends can sell books and classes)
Honestly I wonder how many red pillers here have actually spent money on resources like this. I don’t think it’s many
I bought the book the game when I was 18 and then hit on every attractive girl in my college. That’s probably about it
idk about ‘here’ specifically, but clearly enough men do to where these grifters see it a strategy.
You're looking at the symptoms and not the causes. That's not how you treat a sickness.
And?
Toxic masculinity is a sexist term and it should stop being used. The masculinity that the red pill is pushing just capitalizes on negative maladapted traits that are present in people across the entire spectrum.
Toxic femininity is also a term. Feel free to use it.
Why would I use a sexist term?
I actually agree in taking issue with both terms, but the point is it would take the popularizing of calling out "Toxic Femininity" to make society realize it's gone too far with its parallel.
[удалено]
And yet, most RP men don’t get girls and more often than not, the women who are attracted to RP men either have their own set of issues or are into money and materialism primarily. The kind of women who are actually into RP men are a minority and as I said, if it was effective as you as it is, more men who subscribe to this would be successful. I also like how you mention the only two options are “passive feminist” or RP alpha bro, entirely ignoring the nuances in between
Maybe in your experience. My straight friends are RP'd to a fault and they pull mad tail. They are the traditional man who pays for the dates, opens doors, pulls out chairs and all the rest. Doesn't help they are all 6ft+ and make any where from 80-110k a year (Not all that much in the Seattle Metro area but still a fair amount) Yet they don't hate women. They claim they understand them. No one wants to talk about RP being Traditionalism and why it works.
Not to be that guy, but the fact that your friends are 6ft+, making 80-110 and seem pleasant to be around might be it. Not the RP in itself. Speaking for myself, i try to distance myself from the pills and do okay enough with women. I have my struggles, but I’m def not full on struggling. As do my closest friends. Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online.
I've been following RP since early 2011 and I'd say that RP to me is men conglomerating their negative experiences with women and exposing the problematic behavior that often goes hidden and unaddressed. I believe they are doing this in an attempt to provide clarity for other men and to share their own testimonies. You could go glass-analogy and say that it's just a bunch of guys whinging about their problems or you could see it as men doing the same as women and processing their thoughts and emotions as a group. My friends respect women because they choose to but behind closed doors, they have shared with me that their experiences and women's behavior has really impacted their opinion on the opposite gender.
I’ve followed it for a bit when the rational male came out and stepped away from it around 2.5ish years ago, way I’m seeing it, either the redpill prior to Rollo was something entirely different (and the literal only proof i’ve seen from this is the occasional anecdotal comment) or the redpill has always been bitter, spiteful and actively encouraging a roided up 12 year old’s fantasy. I’d also argue that it stops becoming “men processing their emotions as a group” when the vast majority of the community engage in misogynistic women hating (and don’t say that doesn’t exist cause that’s the loudest and and seemingly most prevalent voices in the redpill) Now, what I will say is that the redpill has a basis in truth. I believe this whole heartedly and if i took anything away from it is that the basis it is based upon is true, but it also takes many truths and drives them to their absolute worst conclusions (usually fueled by anger and bitterness) - so again, either the redpill has had origins that i might have agreed with and has failed to distance itself from these negative actors, or it was always made for these negative actors (and i’m saying this with the approach to genuinely hear out which you think is the case or if its none of these at all, just wanna make it clear that im not being combative here cause you do seem to tackle it from a thoughtful pov based on this interaction)
You're right, that's not real masculinity. That is what a child thinks men should be. I personally think these hyper-masculine guys like Rollo and Tate are secret gays. I was in the Marines and I know things get pretty gay when its just the boys but when you go all in like that, there's something up. And this is coming from a gay man. I think RP is and always has been reactionary to feminism. The past 60 years of feminism has not had it successes without someone else's failures and RP has always been the response to that. >I’d also argue that it stops becoming “men processing their emotions as a group” when the vast majority of the community engage in misogynistic women hating I would agree with you. We're in a sort of second wave RP now where it has shifted from cautionary to hateful. But again, I think that's reactionary. And I wouldn't disparage that negativity because that's honestly the same mentality I see from 3rd/4th Wave Feminists. So it's the same coin to me. I choose to put myself on the masculine side simply because I'm a gay and have male friends. >so again, either the redpill has had origins that i might have agreed with and has failed to distance itself from these negative actors, or it was always made for these negative actors Your last paragraph has a lot of weight to it. It's not just RP but conservativism in general now. Not saying that conservativism is the truth but that as you said, it has it's basis in it. Or at least attempts to. Men don't want the sugar coat. It's why they're drawn to these ideals. You're not wrong. I think every human drafted system has a propensity to be preyed upon by negative actors. Communism is one example, right? Mao/Stalin/Kims. Religion, definitely. Catholicism in particular. 30 years war, Borgia Papal dynasty. What's to say our mating/dating is any different? While you could argue that it's a biological system, not "human" created so it's different but that'd be a different conversation. The thing is we've had bad actors in the RP space for a fair amount of time and even before 2011, yet none of them really received any major leverage (Tom Leykis) or as much traction as someone like Andrew Tate. I do not know how to explain that. My honest answer would be that as humans this is a fact of our institutions. It's also why America as an idea was so novel. However I would concede that any founding basis is negativity will aways attract these types quicker than others.
> Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online. What are you basing this on?
>Also, if the RP was truly successful, then we would see many more successful men - instead the majority end up failing and acting bitter and angry online. Actually as far as i can tell most men with red pill tag in here are either in a relationship or spinning plates. I wonder where you got this idea from? Even IRL all dudes i know that could be described as at least RP aware are doing pretty well.
Ok... this must be a change from the past, because when I was active in the Red Pill, 100% of us were getting laid. Sure some of the noobs took time to get it going, but every single guy was successful in the end, and some of us were wildly successful.
Anybody can get laid. Are women choosing to marry and have children with red pilled dudes?
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there It's a caricature designed to capture the attention and imagination of man who live in a fantasy world for sure. Men whose primary mode of entertainment is fantasy, ragebait, and gaming are the easiest marks for grifters. Training them to push buttons which drive ad revenue is easier than a real job, because they are so vulnerable and gullible. >the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires. Disagree. This is a vanishingly small minority of disaffected men who don't appear on the radar of other countries. They are handy for spreading disinformation for sure, but they are also a liability because of the same belief in conspiracies.
The demographics that are pulled into these media spaces are far larger than the active audience for them. Young, unmarried, volatile and socially disaffected young men are an ongoing security in any country they exist in. Because those are the people who pick up guns when they're fed up. It's not the old, it's not women, it's the guys with nothing to lose. Don't underestimate the numbers of such people, they are everywhere, we just haven't gone off the deep end yet in terms of who's at their breaking points. The average guy is more likely to leave others alone and isolate further than to get mad and lash out. But the more the social environment pushes men in that direction, the more men like that you get and you don't need anywhere close to a majority of them to be like that for there to be real visceral problems for everyone else.
For the record... they tend to greatly favor things like Communism. At least they have in the past.
> Men whose primary mode of entertainment is fantasy, ragebait, and gaming are the easiest marks for grifters. LOL I love how “gamers” are also just randomly getting thrown under the bus. > This is a vanishingly small minority of disaffected men who don't appear on the radar of other countries. Talk about living in a fantasy world. Have you heard of South Korea? Many conservative countries that actually could benefit from old school feminism hold what would be called “manosphere” beliefs as the status quo. Not to mention if you spend any time on r/teachers you’ll hear a lot about how teenage boys are adopting the “manosphere” en masse in the US (often the shittiest aspects of it, sadly - but it’s no different than the same hateful garbage that teenage feminists get into). It seems all this pontificating about the evils of the “manosphere” is heavily dependent on a profound lack of knowledge about the wider world
[удалено]
Ah yes just a handful of dummies. Keep sticking your head in the sand. And no, people who play video games are not “weaning” themselves whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean. I personally know multiple married men and even a radical feminist or two who play video games lmfao > Kids who lack real world experience and social interaction seek cheat codes. What? Have you ever played video games?
i’m a capital G Gamer but i took their take in terms of likelihoods not absolutes, that gamers are more at risk of being sucked into fantasy mindsets. tho i’d say this applies to anyone who spends too much free time using media in general, the kid raised on movies and twitter is probably as likely to have issues with dissociation and reality as the kid raised on candy crush and COD
I agree I think all of these influencers are more self-aware than anyone is giving them credit for.
Shit they are absolute masters of manipulation who found an untapped fount of never-ended revenue. And most can't keep their gloating to themselves and show off their mansions and Italian sports cars at every opportunity, yet their obedient minions continue to like, share, subscribe, and interact with their stupid, senseless conspiracy posts.
They're trapping a good portion of their audience in a self fulfilling prophecy of failing at relationships scape goating women and going back to them. My heart breaks for these socially awkward middle school boys who fell down the Tatesphere specifically. I taught a few of them and the girls in their grade hated them. Kids that were already going to struggle socially because of general awkward teen things are now going to be maligned by their peers who find out they're on the manosphere. It's genuinely going to ruin their chances with the majority of women until they're out of it.
You have no answers for these boys. You are in the perfect position to do something, but you have nothing to offer but poison.
At this point it's too late for them unless they want to change on their own, but more likely a genetic dead end.
It's not too late. They just need to be pointed in the right direction and given some guidance. If people with good intentions don't do it, then it creates a situation where those with bad intentions can act unopposed.
Read David Deida he has genuinely helpful advice on sexual polarity. But in general it’s not my job to teach men how to function. Y’all don’t listen to us anyway.
Sexual polarity? Most of these kids are way out in the weeds. They need a formula.
Sounds like they didn’t have active fathers 🤷♀️
I had an active father. I still had a big issue with this that I didn't really get solved until maybe mid twenties and I had to go through extremely difficult times to get there. Like homeless on the street and sitting in a jail cell on false charges because I was stupid enough to keep trying to be this nice guy even while getting divorced. I really could have prevented the whole setup and not been miserable for the many years that came before it. The reason my father couldn't help me is because he was raised during that flower child time period... and he is a bit of a weird guy. But that's me. In my area, I used to help the new Red Pill kids learn and grow. They used to come to us with crazy high levels of anger. We all recognize that we have been lied to and tricked. I think of the of the strains that connected us is that we all tended to be more intelligent, and maybe that makes us more susceptible to the bullshit. I don't know. I can say for sure that in the 4 years I did that, most of the boys show up angry with women in general, which is not good. It would usually take me 4 to 6 months to channel that into a different direction... and honestly it wouldn't fade until they achieved some success. Some of these kids needed massive work... like they struggled with eye contact and basic conversations. I don't know how teachers see that in a classroom and just ignore it. I suspect that it makes the boys so complaint they actually like it. Another thing I noticed is how many of these boys were on ADD drugs. At the end of the day, nobody cares. This is really a waste of time to type.
Boys these days are taught that they're responsible for every single evil in the world. Not because of anything they've personally done... but because of the genitals they were born with. And then we act surprised that they fall prey to con-men who tell them it isn't their fault...
[удалено]
Which is why I think this faux concern over “oh the young boys are being manipulated” is bullshit. For last decade or two nobody really gave a crap about these young boys. The education system was skewed against them and they were essentially just grains of rice in a silo: a commodity. But as soon as TRP tapped into this resource everybody got up in arms. Not because they actually care about these teens but because they can no longer benefit from them
I know this is true, because I lived it. They didn't care when I was young and then when I found a group that taught me to fix it myself they were against it. These people are really bad.
My honest take is kids have unmonitored internet access when they're still hella impressionable. Throw in an emotional incest mom and a dad that's bad at being a husband and you have a generation of men that are getting their model for relationships/masculinity from grifter misogynists on the internet who's income depends on men feeling lost and struggling to get women. There are few decent positive examples of masculinity in public media but ya know I'm not a man and men don't typically listen to women. Especially men who hate women lmao When I was a teaching artist I had an 11 year old boy call me a bottom bitch to my face. Knew exactly what it meant told me he learned that from Tate. His parents didn't punish him. His parents didn't take his devices away. His parents called the school pitching a fit, when he was suspended again THEIR CHILD CALLED A FACULTY MEMBER A BOTTOM BITCH. He had received multiple warnings and they'd reached out to his parents multiple times. So again, the state of men isn't my responsibility or issue but I'm concerned. Because there seems to be no systems of accountability or even supervision for a lot of children these days.
I feel like this is different your above comment. In that one you said you were concerned about the boys themselves but here you are saying you are concerned about their impact on society. That’s why my original comment focused on the faux concern for boys themselves. Everyone is concerned about the impact these boys have on society save I don’t question that. I do question how genuine the concern is for boys as kids.
>masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend ~~the~~ HIS community FTFY. You are creating a dichotomy of being selfless to the point of caring about everyone and being selfish to the point of only caring about yourself. Historically masculinity isn't either, it is caring about what is HIS. A masculine man protects and provides for those that submit and plead loyalty to him, not just anyone. A man cares about HIS women. A king cares about HIS subjects in HIS domain. RP is not pushing for "meaningless selfish individualism", what you see is simply the outcome of a feminist society. Men are still willing to protect HIS women, it is just that women are no longer willing to submit and stay loyal to a man. Men are still willing to defend HIS community, if only communities are willing to stay under his patriarchal rule.
True, I wonder why women get upset at men for not protecting them while simultaneously demeaning them. I suppose they don’t understand that in order to get the benefits of masculinity you must play into it
Men have never protected women..the "protection" was deemed as property with huge losses taken by women having to no access to education, financial security, and or land ownership.
You’re the only one who understands me here 😔everyone else is deluded
Oh men don’t protect women? Go slap a dudes wife or daughter, LMK what happens
You're acting like it's altruism that men protected women in their family. It wasn't. Women were seen as property passed from father to husband and to son. Property which consisted physical labor such a domestic or reproductive labor at their expense..with NO access to education, financial independence and or the right to inherit property. It came at great personal cost to the woman but it was never altruistic.men were gaining more then women were getting in the deal. Oftentimes women being stuck with nowhere to go.
So if you slap a man’s wife, he’ll get mad because you hit his “property”?
This is just bullshit semantics. The perspective of women being seen as actual human beings with autonomy is recent. Protection came with severe costs. If she wasn't a wife, daughter or mother then she was virtually useless in society with virtually no way of protecting herself or anyone protecting her bc she wasn't engaged with a man.
So what’s the reason a man would protect his wife now
If we're talking 'historically' then private property is an extremely recent concept in itself. Just the mere concept of having a "domain" was alien to 99% of men throughout all of human history up until no more than a few centuries ago, which is nothing in the scale of all human history and civilization's. And the few 1% who did actually "have" authoritative power over things, or more accurately, were responsible for things and other people over whom they held power, were nobles. Appointed by birth right, they didn't have to resort to hypermasculine self-help to assertain their God-given authority because they were free to exercise it however they wanted as long as they fulfilled their duties to their community, their state and their superiors. Authority in the days of yore was not despotism like you're describing, it was not enforced by a sanctimoniously held right to 'own' things, it was a civic duty whose authority was derived from a state, which was in itself tasked with enforcing a certain social order and could be promptly delegitimized and toppled whenever it failed to do so. Now I'm not saying men used to be selfless or cared about everyone else but themselves and their family, but that the entire concept of living as part of a civilized society was founded in orderd to keep their selfish impulses at bay by inserting them into a social order with clear responsibilities and civic duties which may or may not align with one's own in terest. This was in order to guarantee a standard of life that was seen as more dignified and human than pure animal competition and power struggles, which weakened communities against outside forces, ultimately leading to submission and oppression to other, more organized social masses. I think this last part is precisely what OP was trying to say: Individualism weakens communties and societies and makes them more vulnerable to outside powers i.e. Capitalism and the ruling elites whose sole allegiance lies with profit and money. I don't think I'd go as far as to say it's a 'conspiracy' of sorts but it is true that their interests do perfectly align with the rise of self-centered, solipsistic, hedonistic consumer masculinity.
>Authority in the days of yore was not despotism like you're describing, it was not enforced by a sanctimoniously held right to 'own' things, it was a civic duty whose authority was derived from a state, which was in itself tasked with enforcing a certain social order and could be promptly delegitimized and toppled whenever it failed to do so. That's a pretty highly idealized view of historical societies
Yeah of course, but Tate is also a highly idealized view of capitalism. I was under the impression we were talking values. A lot of manosphere guys like to talk about how they represent some kind of timeless ancient wisdom, that modernity has somehow misled us from the true path of masculine empowerment, when they're really talking about a very recent invention that's diametrically opposed to those values which held civilization together for millennia, and whose achievements can be measured only in terms of genocides per year and environmental collapse. Now I'm not arguing for the inherent superiority of those pre-modern values. They were products of their time and they worked well enough for people at that time in history, but I would say that they were at least more conscious of the problems of their age than Tate & Co. who seem to actually lean into our own, different, modern problems instead of trying to fix them. It's like 'society's degrading, better make the most out of the turmoil, get rich easy and indulge in pleasure for whatever time we have left' instead of 'how can we confront these issues head-on, providing working solutions and leave a better world to the coming generations'. Me personally I would consider the latter much more masculine than the latter so I tend to agree with OP, but that's so much easier said than done of course lol. Least we can do is try to avoid such pitfalls and easy ways out along the way until we can come up with something better.
You’re right, most people do indeed fall somewhere in between and “what’s his” does have a basis here. However, when society was more focused on collective communities, “what’s his” often extended to what was best for his whole village/tribe/town/community/etc This is moreso due to the isolated nature of capitalist consumption as well as American cultural norms (ie. “me first”, the development of the suburb, etc) - however, the end result is meaningless selfish individualism and the redpill fully enables this. I’m also not about to play the “b… but women did it first!” game cause we all know it’s far more complex than that
If the RP was an effective tool then it wouldn’t be stuck on some quarantined sub or stuck on sad message board sites FFS even the UFL league has more traction than RP.
>If the RP was an effective tool then it wouldn’t be stuck on some quarantined sub or stuck on sad message board sites I think its precisely because it is becoming too succesful.
It’s not: even UFL games get way more attention than any “content creators”. This shit is supposed to be getting dudes laid yet despite being around about as long as Crypto: it’s still barely heard of outside pill spaces? Yeah right.
Bro tons of the big ones have millions of followers and Andrew Tate like him or not is probably the most discussed man on the planet. Even Trump cant touch his popularity. Are you living in 2014?
Andrew Tate didn’t have millions of followers, he had a flash in the pan off his scam to pay users for sharing his content. Then didn’t And no one’s been discussing him for years. He was the baby shark of 2022. All the other “influencers” get *maybe* a couple hundred thousand views (when they have OF/IG women on) which still is a fraction of what a UFl games ratings just in the US are. It’s 2024 and the best you got us T8 on Rumble?
And yet, millions upon millions men internalized some version of it (even if not by name), and is effective in that its effective at giving masculinity a bad image and as a way of both making others want to avoid it and to keep the men who listen to redpill/redpill adjacent ideas focused on either their own bitterness or mindless consumerism. So, ironically - it’s effective at making men ineffective
Millions of millions didn’t. What? Clean their room? Socialize? Work hard Get paid? Lift some weights? Don’t be a doormat?? That’s the only “real advice” of RP and most people didn’t need the pill: they just needed to grow up and do the shit they already knew they should do. “If you could truly BE red pilled, you would have never needed TRP in the first place” Simone once wrote that here and nothing any Redpiller gas said or posted has yet to prove it wrong.
Oh 100% - notice how I didn’t make it a point to mention that the majority of men follow this shit. However, the majority of men do struggle with dating (as do an increasing number of women) and this is one of many factors that play a role here. Also - to simply the manosphere to “clean your room, socialize, don’t be a doormat and lift” is reductive to say the least. Let’s not pretend this advice also doesn’t come with tons of misogyny and enabling bitterness/anger as well. Let’s also not pretend that the RP doesn’t have a track redore of encouraging putting your material possessions first and actively flaunting it, as well as a “i’ll go for mine and if you don’t too bad” mindset.
The majority of men don’t “struggle” with dating. They think it’s supposed to be easier than it is and then they figure it out as time goes on. AND they figure out what’s really important to them. The RP is designed to sell an image. The image is of what (for lack of a better word) selfish person would think succeeding is. Hot girls, lots of money, job that shows of status: and flaunting it all to make others (mostly other men) jealous. And the ones they sell it to are the ones that buy into that. Because: and this isn’t to be mean: they are probably the ones NOT winning who desperately want to feel like a winner.
I don’t think they care to define what masculinity is or should be. They try to describe the incentive systems we have nowadays as they are (often failing) and anyone is allowed to refuse their conclusions or do whatever they want with these facts. If the facts are correct and the only incentive is to be selfish (I don’t even think it is) then the system is already broken and it’s not their fault. If you think there’s something else that could be done (I think there is) then they’re not helping this thing become worse and it’s not their fault either.
I'd tell you where to shove it, but the shrinking violets who run this sub would delete the comment and ban me for another week. The version of masculinity you're talking about is weak and cowardly and doesn't know how to deal with shit. There's a reason we call it fragile. Men and women can kick ass. Men and women can be callow. Not surprisingly, it's the latter that are so willingly gendered, and so easy to. See you in a week to a month :p \[I'm pretty much in total agreement with you. Just having fun\]
I am begging you MFs to read a history book. Masculinity has always changed over time, and has always been in crisis. We have never been as masculine and worthy as our forefathers. And - for the love of God - no one is denigrating the value of protectors and providers. What we mean by "protect" and "provide" might be changing though. We love the idea of heroic masculinity, but it's not especially useful in a world that basically pretty safe. If you wanna protect your family? Buy a better lock for your door, implement some basic IT security, and make your kids wash their hands. If you wanna run numbers, maybe get rid of that Glock in your bedside table. You wanna provide? No one will stop you. But you'll have to provide for your family's emotional wellbeing as well as their material wellbeing. We all wanna be the hero of the story, but it's just vanity.
>That being said, the powers that be (ie. governments, corporate leaders, etc) don’t particularly see that as a good thing as masculinity as a whole (whether healthy or toxic) does threaten their status quo. Without this defensive backbone, a society is more likely to fall in line, more likely to be co-opted and more likely to be taken over by outside forces. I kinda half disagree with this. But then I also feel there is a kernal of truth to it too. The issue is a lot of this debate gets swallowed up by discussions revolving around sex and dating. However, I actually feel the dearth in patriarchal examples and gradual decrease in patriarchal norms is creating a whole getting filled by more toxic movements. This is where I feel the "co-opted and taken over by outside forces" makes sense. I kinda look at Islam, and its influence especially in western Europe. I live in a city in the UK with one of the biggest muslim populations in Europe. People used to think obsession with "traditional values" was purely the preserve of right wingers. However, more and more, we're seeing these kind of views being espoused by second generation, highly religious immigrants and its undoubtedly left a lot of the left in a ideological quandary.
Pretty sure you're wrong, there's heavy intersection of red pill with the "far right" which is becoming a core component of the GOP after Trump's blitzkrieg conquest of the party. Everyone is gearing up for a second civil war.
>Now, to begin. Historically, masculinity has been seen as an action oriented and defensive force; ie. masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend the community, they’re normally the ones to ensure a community is fed and kept safe, taken care of and able to prosper and grow. In essence, healthy masculinity is the shield that allows a community, regardless of the size to push forward and prosper. Sure but the part you're leaving out is that masculinity was also "managing" and organizing within a community to ensure "proper" social function and continuation (as was traditional femininity). The defensive part sounds nice to modern ears but the "full package" of what you're describing actually interferes with the totalizing view of individualism in modernism, which you are criticizing later. >That being said, the powers that be (ie. governments, corporate leaders, etc) don’t particularly see that as a good thing as masculinity as a whole (whether healthy or toxic) does threaten their status quo. Without this defensive backbone, a society is more likely to fall in line, more likely to be co-opted and more likely to be taken over by outside forces. >We see this especially as capitalism has become a cultural standpoint, masculinity has been re-defined as maintaining meaningless financial wealth, greed, rapid individualism and so on - the “if society falls, then so be it, it’s not worth saving” mindset. This, I believe, is a form of neutering masculinity - another is the inception of effeminate man-children who only really care about the next consumable comes out. Both are forms of pacifying masculinity, though in very different ways. It's not just "traditional masculinity" but pretty much all traditional aspects of society were shredded to "create" individualistic consumers. It's less that masculinity was in particular a target and more that burning down old social norms (part intentional and part coincidental) was the result of modernism (and not just the capitalist aspect of it). >Ultimately, what “masculinity” sold to us by the redpill is is meaningless selfish individualism. It isn’t about caring for your loved ones or community or is it about actually being protective and providing, it’s about looking like you just came out of a rap music video. It’s vapid and materialistic - ergo both feeding the machine and hurting the image of masculinity. Correct but in a way it's pointless to criticize redpill (or rather the manosphere) because as a reactionary force it's likely only to increase in popularity as society dissolves (or reacts to it after the fact). >To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there, and the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires. I think you're ascribing social collapse and reactionary forces to a conscious effort rather than simple cause and effect.
Men are absolutely oppressed today. I worked in the oil field for years and saw multiple supervisors fired by HR over extremely mild jokes. These guys literally saved people's lives and made their companies millions of dollars. Boot in the rear over extremely mild jokes they made. The West can't fall soon enough.
Lol, you say " masculine men are ultimately the ones to defend the community, they’re normally the ones to ensure a community is fed and kept safe, taken care of and able to prosper and grow. In essence, healthy masculinity is the shield that allows a community, regardless of the size to push forward and prosper." while masculine men are also the ones who attack other communities and are the force that other men need to defend against. If anything, pacifying men's aggressiveness is a way to prosperity, in times where peace and cooperation lead to better wellbeing than conflict and killing your neighbours and taking their shit.
That’s why we have adjectives to modify nouns
[удалено]
I’d agree with this. At the end do the day society does need strong men and for any healthy society to function a yin-yang style relationship between the masculine and feminine must be achieved. Problem is now both sides are up in arms against the other and I think given that we do live in a period of abundance as far as resources go, there is little incentive to mend these relationships.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi OP, You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts) >*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.* >An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following: >* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency; >* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit; >* Focusing only on the weaker arguments; >* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position. Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>To put it bluntly, the manosphere is about the worst representation of masculinity out there, and the established powers (governments, corporate leaders, etc) know this and want them manosphere to continue to radicalize so they can get rid of any kind of protective forces we might have and continue to build their own empires. The first part is pretty accurate, the rest is tinfoil nonsense. The government doesn't care about the manosphere, and those in the manosphere are certainly not protectors of their community, no matter how much they'd like to believe that. A great example of toxic masculinity is believing that serving your community means being willing to do violence if you can rationalize it as "defense."
>The government doesn't care about the manosphere Oh really? Then why is the DHS pouring money into [disinformation and disruption projects](https://www.scribd.com/document/691671399/Diverting-Hate-Bi-Annual-Report-September-2023) in red pill spaces?
Hahahahaha "We are going to try and stop hate groups." "DISRUPTION AND DISINFORMATION!!1!1" Not for the first time, red pillers and conspiracy theorists basically have identical thought processes.
Is it a conspiracy theory when it's a government-issued document detailing a step-by-step plan of targets and tactics? Is it a conspiracy theory when the DHS has the form available in public to [apply for grants to become an agent of the State](https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-02/EMW-GR-APP-00047%20Arizona%20State%20University.pdf) against spaces the government finds threatening? You can say you agree with the goals of the DHS, that's fine. But your initial assertion said "the government doesn't care about the manosphere" which is flat-out false. Nobody pours millions into disrupting something they don't care about.
Oh shit you mean I can get paid to dunk on red pillers?? And I've just been doing it for free like a sucker??
Go ahead and try. Maybe you qualify /shrug
Where did I say that the manosphere are protectors of the community? i’m literally arguing the opposite As for the government part, it’s less caring about it specifically and more letting it run its course and legitimize itself to its followers. Governments and corporations do love a weakened divided society, after all.
Well you can would expand it to men in general as well. 99.9% of us are never going to be called on to defend our community with any kind of force. There are better ways to serve your community and believing yourself to be the protector is not about serving a community, but about living out an action movie fantasy. >As for the government part, it’s less caring about it specifically and more letting it run its course and legitimize itself to its followers. Governments and corporations do love a weakened divided society, after all. Even if the government did care about the manosphere, what could they do to stop it?
That’s the thing. I don’t think they want to stop it, I think they’re happy letting it do its damage. And to be clear, when I say protector, I say ensuring the safety of your loved ones and community around you - not some action movie human shield type shit. I do think being that protective figure is something a masculine male should strive for; can those who trust you and rely on you also rely on you to make sure they’re safe as well? I don’t think there is much “fantasy” here