Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
happiness

What do you think of "The Red Pill" worldview?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I picked up this summary of "TRP" philosophy from reddit. I don't see much of anything that I disagree with.

________________________________

Unplugging from the Feminine Matrix can be nearly as painful as Neo emerging into a very different reality. It is often a very painful process to review your past relationship failures and develop an entirely new understanding of them. Many guys kick themselves over and over again, lamenting the lost years when they were trapped by a society stacked against them and a set of beliefs and ideologies that simply do not work. They were told to "Just Be Yourself." They stayed "Friend" with girls who rejected them in hopes of earning their favor. They married women for richer or poorer who divorced them when the business dried up and seemingly changed overnight. Men have various problems with unplugging but perhaps the greatest is the discovery that women don’t want to hear about your problems, your deep emotions, and that they don’t love you in the way society and Disney has promised you will be loved. There is no Fairy Tale and there is no such thing as unconditional love.

Women want a strong, masculine, rock to lean on during their monthly emotional roller coaster. All we have been told about “communication” and “sensitivity” and being a good “provider” being the keys to making a woman want to have sex with you WAS A LIE. Yes, it was all a Shit Test and you fell for it...which helps explain why there is often so much anger when unplugging. Let us, just for a marked change of pace try for a moment to consider the man’s perspective.

Consider the typical divorce filed in 80% of cases by the woman for no reason except she is somehow unaaapppy. She goes to find her happiness, he loses his wife, children, ½ of his income plus child support and still only sees his kid once a month. His wife divorced him to fuck Hawt Alpha-Fuck who now sleeps in his bedroom, on his bed, and wakes up his kids with her screams while he rails her. That is not an exception or unusual in any way. That is very, very common.

When you realize there were ways that you could have acted and beliefs you could have adopted that would have retained the attraction, or generated the attraction in so many other cases, the only possible response is anger.

In fact, unplugging goes through all the stages of grief because you are, in effect, giving up and mourning an entire set of beliefs- Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.

The Tingles: The vaginal tingles are more than getting her wet. A women who gets the tingles is wet and wants to get fucked, usually hard. Alpha behaviors generate the tingles. Beta Behaviors may be nice and sweet but they do not generate the tingles. Omega behaviors turn off the tingles.

Male/Female Attraction Cues: Basically, whatever is good for making (and raising!!) babies is what the other sex finds sexually attractive. Men: Young hourglass figured fertile female with big boobies. Women: Strong leader able to protect and provide for the children. Check out The Rational Male for many exceptional articles on this topic.

Alpha: There is not total agreement on this nebulous concept. The “Alpha Male” is the guy who always has girls hanging off him and probably will rack up a triple digit “n” count (of sexual partners) while creating many Alpha Widows ready to divorce her Beta husband for cash and prizes after she fakes it with him for a few years. The Alpha is in the “top” 10% or so of attraction quotient. He is comfortable around women, handsome, masculine, confident, self- assured, and often arrogant and narcissistic. He is usually dismissive of women and treats them like a kid sister, completely unfazed by her charms. This is enormously sexually attractive to women and the foundation of “Game” which is an attempt to mimic the Alpha behaviors of men who are successful with women.

Beta: The poor provider who gets shit on by everybody and rarely gets laid characterizes the Beta. A Beta male shows his sensitive side to women. He does not stand up to them but instead bows down to the divine majesty of feminine power. The Beta Husband’s motto is: “I have to do whatever she says because she has the pussy.” A Beta does not recognize or stand up to Shit Tests. Beta has a bad reputation because while it is behavior that makes women feel warm and fuzzy inside, it does not activate the tingles or make her horny. SOME Beta behaviors are necessary for any LTR but the vast majority of men today have been conditioned to overdo it by orders of magnitude.

Omega: The real worthless dregs of sexual society are the Omega’s. These guys don’t just worship pussy, they put it on a pedestal, they stand in awe of it often to the point they can’t even approach a girl without shivering in fear. They live lives of desperation until ultimately they are “chosen” by a land whale who mines him for the meager resources he is able to provide. Omega behaviors don’t provide vaginal tingles and they don’t make anybody feel good. The most common adjectives for them are “pathetic”, “ridiculous”, and “cringe-worthy.”

Hypergamy: “Marrying Up” is a very strong instinct in women. Women want a man who is taller, smarter, wealthier, and a better conversationalist who leads them in the bedroom and out. They get sexually aroused when a man takes charge and leads. Conversely, this means women do NOT become sexually aroused unless the man is fulfilling her hypergamous instinct. If his father dies, or he becomes depressed, the woman's hypergamous instinct will quickly surface and she will lose sexual attraction.

In today’s feminine matrix, Hypergamy means that 10% of the men have 90% of the sex while the vast majority of men are starved for affection and female attention.

Hypergamy means if you are married your wife is ALWAYS looking to trade up and, she will always be like a monkey, ready to swing to the next branch while her other hand is still firmly on the previous branch. Men are also hypergamous and prefer younger, more fertile, and curvy women. However, the dual mating strategy of women makes hypergamy especially problematic because it is virtually impossible to satisfy! If you are Albert Alpha with a 10 inch cock who fulfills all her darkest dreams, she will begin to yearn for Billy Beta who listen to her feeewings and whisper sweet nothings into her ear. Hypergamy means simply that women are never satisfied and can never be satisfied. Their levels of dissatisfaction can only be managed, never satisfied, says hypergamy.

Female Dual Mating Strategy: AF/BB- Almost all women want Alpha Fucks. They get wet when a powerful, masculine male asserts dominance and leads them into passionate sex which they think “just happened.” In fact, a strong man led them to it but don’t tell them that- magicians and their tricks and all. Almost all women ALSO want Beta Bucks. They want a provider to take care of them and are more than willing to fake passion and give up sex for years in order to get it.

Shit Tests: Women test men to determine if they are really a “leader” worthy of an Alpha Fuck. Most of the time it is unconscious and they have no idea what they are doing. A Shit Test is an unreasonable tone or attitude.

A Shit test in Pick Up situations is the standard bar-banter with the peacocking, feather strutting, pretend Alpha males withstanding the verbal barrages from the interested females. The solution in BOTH situations is Agree and Amplify, ignore, deflect, amused mastery (treat it like it is something an endearing little girl did) or nuke (call them out and stop it).

Game: A set of behavioral modifications consistent with observations implemented in order to maximize attraction. Game is being the “Alpha” male, cocky, funny, arrogant, irrationally confident, easy going, in charge, strong, masculine. Game has been criticized as inauthentic and praised as equivalent to makeup and heels. Early game was sometimes reduced to memorized scripts but more recent game emphasizes the devil-may-care attitude of complete confidence, preferably with a smirk. The word is ‘fake it until you make it.’

Frame: Your reality is your “frame.” The unflappable, cool, calm, rational, Alpha dude who attracts women is a good frame. If a girl is irritated and rude this is a Shit Test and a test of your Frame. Responding to her in kind with rudeness, hostility or anger is ‘adopting her frame.’ Responding to her like she is a child and you are the adult is ‘maintaining your frame.’ Your "frame" is WHO you are at your best.

The Hamster: The female rationalization hamster is widely known as the deadliest animal with the most endurance of any rodent in the universe. Actually the Hamster is another metaphor and a critique of female psychology, suggesting that women often use emotion to literally rewrite history in their own minds. Imagine a hamster running on a wheel going round and round and round, changing little emotional perceptions of something that happened and you get a small sense of the power of this beast. Let me give you an insight into the workings of the hamster with a real world example. A girl is laying in her bed thinking and the Hamster wheel powers up: I had sex with Tom yesterday. It was OK. Tom didn’t call back today. Tom didn’t respond to my text. Tom is an asshole. I would not have had sex with an asshole. Tom was pretty aggressive when he was fucking me. It wasn’t even that good. Tom didn’t get my verbal consent. Tom had sex with me and I didn’t consent. That asshole Tom raped me…squeak squeak!! Men also have a Hamster.

The Cock Carousal: Like the horses on a carousal going up and down, a woman on the CC jumps from cock to cock as the wheel goes round. Our society encourages women to jump on as many Alpha cocks as she can find in her 20’s to satisfy the Alpha Fucks while she is then encouraged to “settle down” in her 30’s with the same type of man that she sneered at, ignored, and belittled in her 20's). As the Wall approaches the CC rider suddenly decides that she is no longer a slut. Now she is a born-again virgin and her new boyfriend, a niiice guy who makes good money is not going to get sex on the first date, or the 2nd or the 5th. Nope, she needs to establish this new relationship where she rations the sex in order to control her husband. She settles for a Beta Buck who can never excite her like all the hawwwt guys she could never get to commit. She throws sex at her Beta pet for months or years, as long as it takes, and then it tapers off, usually to twice a month, often beginning on the Honeymoon.

The Wall: Beautiful women spend their youth not just fucking Alpha cocks and rewarding the most arrogant, aloof, “bad guys” they can find but also reaping all the benefits of their beauty and fertility. Men fall over themselves to please them. They have sexless male orbiters buy them things and provide validation when yet another hawwwt “Boyfriend” pumps and dumps them. They get let into the clubs. Men approach them and give them attention. Then, fate steps in and suddenly they are like a former star football player who is now beat up, used up, has 1 to many concussions, and suddenly the men (teams) are not paying them attention any longer. A woman whose eggs in the fridge are nearing their expiration date is slamming into the wall and their clock is ticking to lock down a provider to take care of them. See also “Baby Rabies.”

Solopsism: As a consequence of their privileged position in society, and their natural biology, coddled women learn to think in terms of me…me…me. Women are wholly incapable of accepting the suffering of a man- if anything it is sexually arousing to them to see a man hold up under prolonged torture. However, if the man succumbs to the torture, she will feel nothing but disgust. See also Threatpoint or “Sexual Denial in Marriage 2.0.”

Edited by happiness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, happiness said:

All we have been told about “communication” and “sensitivity” and being a good “provider” being the keys to making a woman want to have sex with you WAS A LIE.

Sure, because if your goal is to just have sex with a woman, you don't need those things. If you want a good relationship, you need those things.

3 hours ago, happiness said:

Consider the typical divorce filed in 80% of cases by the woman for no reason except she is somehow unaaapppy.

Made up numbers. Besides, if you marry someone mainly for the sexual satisfaction they provide while simultaneously putting on a façade of "communication", the relationship is going to be a mess. The people you find probably won't treat you well. 

TRP generally consider women to be sub-rational or always overemotional by nature, on top of establishing a narrative with specific claims about sex and minimal reference to the science of sex. Basically, it's just advice to "win" in today's dating and social world (lots of drinking, narcissistic behaviors, extremely sexually permissive) mixed with the presumption of intellectual inferiority of women. I'm not saying that TRP guys are necessarily drunks and narcissists, I'm saying they are people who try to succeed in that (ugly) environment instead of rejecting it.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, this entire thing reads like the screed from the next Elliot Rodger. Hateful trash.

I mean...

4 hours ago, happiness said:

Women want a strong, masculine, rock to lean on during their monthly emotional roller coaster.

I recognize that Objectivism has its own unresolved issues with "masculinity" and "femininity" -- and I believe that Rand made many missteps on this issue that have continued to mislead Objectivists (who, imo, often have a hard time disagreeing with Rand with respect to anything) -- so that's why we sometimes countenance these sorts of arguments.

Still, I would love to have had her response to the idea that a woman "hero worships" due to her PMS, lol. Noble, self-made souls indeed!

4 hours ago, happiness said:

When you realize there were ways that you could have acted and beliefs you could have adopted that would have retained the attraction, or generated the attraction in so many other cases, the only possible response is anger.

From what perspective is this written, and for what audience? Who needs to hear that "the only possible response is anger"? I'd guess the angry.

But when I look back at my past relationships, I don't feel anger. And when I consider my present relationship, I feel great joy. How do I manage to do this without buying into the bullshit represented here?

4 hours ago, happiness said:

Hypergamy means if you are married your wife is ALWAYS looking to trade up and, she will always be like a monkey, ready to swing to the next branch while her other hand is still firmly on the previous branch.

Has the person who wrote this ever met a woman? What was their experience, I wonder?

And, taken at all seriously, how could a man ever respect a woman or feel anything other than contempt for the entire gender?  No wonder there's such great anger associated with this perspective. Fortunately for me, I've met women (but I shudder to think what this might have done to me, if I had read and bought into it at a sufficiently tender age). Maybe my wife is some sort of unique creature in this regard? But I doubt it.

4 hours ago, happiness said:

If you are Albert Alpha with a 10 inch cock who fulfills all her darkest dreams, she will begin to yearn for Billy Beta who listen to her feeewings and whisper sweet nothings into her ear.

The spelling of feelings here exemplifies the level of seriousness and also briskly conveys the underlying hatred and contempt (for, of all things, the feelings of the woman that you love and have married -- your "highest value"!).

4 hours ago, happiness said:

Shit Tests: Women test men to determine if they are really a “leader” worthy of an Alpha Fuck. Most of the time it is unconscious and they have no idea what they are doing. A Shit Test is an unreasonable tone or attitude.

I'm done here -- I've given it too much attention already, perhaps. What must it be like, to see half the populace in this way, as some sort of inscrutable and irrational alien presence? How demeaning. How poisonous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Alpha: There is not total agreement on this nebulous concept. The “Alpha Male” is the guy who always has girls hanging off him and probably will rack up a triple digit “n” count (of sexual partners) while creating many Alpha Widows ready to divorce her Beta husband for cash and prizes after she fakes it with him for a few years. The Alpha is in the “top” 10% or so of attraction quotient. He is comfortable around women, handsome, masculine, confident, self- assured, and often arrogant and narcissistic. He is usually dismissive of women and treats them like a kid sister, completely unfazed by her charms. This is enormously sexually attractive to women and the foundation of “Game” which is an attempt to mimic the Alpha behaviors of men who are successful with women.

Two points:

1. In general, men are sexually attracted to women, and women are sexually attracted to men. You don't have to do anything to turn that switch, it's on by default. You just have to avoid doing things that turn it off. The most common way I see even rich, good looking men turn that switch off is by making women uncomfortable (or by projecting a sense that they won't be able to maintain a comfortable relationship, in a more intimate setting...by avoiding one on one interaction, or failing to respond comfortably to small gestures of intimacy, like a hug or a touch, for instance).

And I can't imagine a single thing that would accomplish that faster than trying to play this "game" you are describing. It doesn't work. It's a scam. Only time it ever works is when the guy doing it is already someone who's comfortable around women (and therefor doesn't flip their switch off).

If you wanna become that guy, BE friends with women. Seek them out, on ANY terms. Pushing them away when they just want to be your friend, in an attempt to mimic this mythical alpha behavior would just deprive you from the only learning tool you have, when it comes to developing confidence and a comfort level around women: actually getting close to, and staying close with, women.

2. I haven't been friends with anyone since high school, who fits into this "alpha male" category. This is how juveniles behave, and what young girls who haven't had time to know any better fall for. This is not how adult men and women behave.

If you behave this way in the adult world, you'll just be locked out by everyone around you. Even if you find a woman willing to put up with you, she's gonna be your only link to the rest of the world. I actually work with a young couple like this, where the guy is a charming, good looking prick, and the girl couldn't be nicer and more personable. Which, ironically, makes the guy even more dependent on her than if he was a lowly beta who seeks her approval at every turn. Only reason why he even has a job is because the company doesn't want to lose her, by firing him.

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading a good book that deconstructs all this anti-woman/ PUA mentality, and offers an alternative approach. One that is respectful of women without putting them on a pedestal, and congruent with Objectivism.

In fact a lot of it seems to be written from a partially Oist perspective (the author fleetingly mentions that reading Atlas Shrugged in college changed his life, in the book, as well). It's from Mark Manson (who's known for "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck", which is the second best "life advice" type book I have ever read in my life), and it's titled "Models: Attract Women Through Honesty". ( I don't think "models" refers to fashion models, but rather "things to model yourself after"...but it is an ambivalent title, on purpose...pretty sure it's meant to mock PUAs).

The two books are very, very different. "The Subtle Art..." is short, it's written in a provocative style (lots of cursing), it throws flashy, provocative ideas around somewhat carelessly, and uses a wide lens to look at life in general. But it's very interesting, and frames a lot of good life advice in some very surprising and original ways.

The "Models..." book on the other hand is longer, analytical, detailed, carefully thought through, and focused on the subject at hand. But, as you go along, you find out something very important: the subject at hand (getting women) is as wide as life itself...because you get women based on who you are, personally and socially, not on what "techniques" or lines you use. So the book actually sets out to encourage the reader to change their entire life, and become an interesting, opinionated, provocative, well dressed and groomed, physically fit, healthy, independent, well traveled, knowledgeable, well read, sexually uninhibited, confident, courageous etc. person. Do that, and women won't be able to resist you...no aggressive, fake alpha behavior needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2018 at 1:50 PM, happiness said:

Female Dual Mating Strategy: AF/BB- Almost all women want Alpha Fucks. They get wet when a powerful, masculine male asserts dominance and leads them into passionate sex which they think “just happened.” In fact, a strong man led them to it but don’t tell them that- magicians and their tricks and all. Almost all women ALSO want Beta Bucks. They want a provider to take care of them and are more than willing to fake passion and give up sex for years in order to get it.
 

False dichotomy.  This assumes men have to choose between one or the other.  Why can't he be both?     

Something else occurs to me: If you make enough money to be a good provider it means that you are productive.  Productiveness (one of the seven major Objectivist virtues) is an "alpha" quality.   What's "beta" about it?

Edited by Craig24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Craig24 said:

Something else occurs to me: If you make enough money to be a good provider it means that you are productive.

Well, even if we fully buy into the "good provider" theory, that is an evolutionary theory. In other words, it deals in men as they lived before specialization (as hunter gatherers, where you proved you are a good provider and protector through behavior, rather than any achievement or possession. And it was a very specific set of behaviors, because there was only one way to be a good provider and protector: be strong, fit, assertive, but also loving, open and honest. Specifically, EMOTIONALLY honest.

This is what the "Red Pill" crowd fails to understand: being honest, being willing to put yourself out there (not being guarded, but rather being willing to take the risk of being hurt), being caring and genuinely curious about a woman's deepest emotions and experiences, etc. is just as attractive as being confident, strong and decisive...and to be attractive beyond a first few short encounters requires you to be both, and be so genuinely. Not play the role of the "nice friend who listens to her boyfriend problems", but be genuinely interested, and know how to make her comfortable to share those things with you.

Also, you gotta know WHO to become genuinely interested in. If you're gonna insist on chasing after someone who rejected you, that's not "alpha male" behavior (I'm using it in quotes because it's a stupid term, I prefer to call it "selfish, confident man"), that's the very definition of a needy man who can't handle the rejection and must validate himself by changing this woman's opinion of him. An alpha male actually wants a woman to make her own decisions (by putting his honest self and his honest intentions, without any stupid tricks and games), and happily respects her decision, whichever way it goes.

As for the reason why so called "good providers" get dumped: it's because they're only good providers materially. Not emotionally, not intellectually, and not sexually. They just bring home the bacon, and think that's good enough. So when the, again so called, alpha male comes around and knows how to make a woman feel sexually desired (which is a HUUUGE turn-on for women, probably the biggest), has interesting stories about people, travel, adventures, AND in general is a guy willing to take risks emotionally and connect on an emotional level, he's everything the bacon bringer-homer is not, in all the ways that actually count.

Also (according to the theory), women aren't specifically attracted to a "good provider", but rather to a "potential good provider". Someone who proves that they have the ability to be good providers. Let's take two identical twins, who were separated at birth, and are now both age 20:

The first one, Mr. A, is a billionaire CEO. He wears the same T-shirt and jeans everywhere he goes, he has a bland haircut,  he spends 14 hours a day working, has a very serious demeanor, he hates talking about his personal life or his emotions to anyone except maybe his therapist or one or two of his closest friends. And he gets embarrassed any time someone openly talks about sex...especially if there are women present. He speaks well, but softly, and prefers to stick with a few of his favorite subjects, mostly work, politics, technology and his wood carving hobby.

The second one, Mr. B, is a college kid who lives in a dorm, and has no material possessions or marketable skills. He has the same haircut as the dude from Vikings, he has cool tattoos, a leather jacket and clean but torn jeans, a V-neck Queens of the Stone Age T-shirt, dogtags and rings, and a big smile on his face. He's loud but friendly, gets along with people despite the fact that he never tries to cater to anyone's needs unsolicited. He'll help you out if you ask, but only if he likes you, and only if you have something to give back. He loves talking about himself, he's open about his emotional and sex life. Annoyingly open. He also doesn't take himself particularly seriously, he's actually a little dismissive about his own problems...he mentions them, but not to complain. Just as a matter of fact.

Guess who is perceived as the "potentially good provider" by women. That's right, mr. B. Because 100,000 years ago, Mr A would've been a terrible provider and protector, while mr. B would've been excellent. Also, not much changed in 100,000 years. Mr. A has a lot of learning to do before he could be a truly good provider, even with billions in the bank. Because money is not enough, if you're not emotionally and physically available to your family. Meanwhile, Mr. B would do fine, if he decided to settle down and have a family. He doesn't want to do that, but that doesn't change the fact that he could if he wanted to...so he's attractive to women.

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×