Where Is The Female Red Pill Movement?

[Medina]

It's easy to hate Redpill but it exists for a reason, it's a reaction, not a cause. We have equality for the first time yet people are more angry, more confused and more alone than ever. Including women. And can you blame them? Society tells them one thing, while biology tells them another.

Just ask yourself why 50 shades of grey is the best seller in a pro-feminist, post-patriarch society.

 

[redpilled]

Because employers are not rational actors. They can have and do have biases which lead them to make choices not purely motivated by economic utility.

But you are saying that employers value women less monetarily for the very same job positions than a man - so why wouldn't they employ them more if it saves them money? Nobody can ever answer this one. Saying "employers are irrational" isn't answering my question. So far, there's no evidence that women are paid less in like-for-like jobs, but there's plenty of conjecture in this thread from some posters that they do. Conjecture is not evidence. It's like you've decided something must be correct, then kept repeating it without any evidence to back it up.

Going back to the genesis of the thread I'll reiterate my point that the genders each face their own bundle of problems. It's not that one clearly has it worse than the other. There are advantages and disadvantages to being a man or a woman.

This sounds "right" in that you would want it to be right, but I don't believe (western!) society treats men and women equally, and that is the problem that (western!) men face. Women are afforded a lot more societal sympathy than men are, and that already tips the balance way in favour of women. Suicide rates are far higher for men than for women. There has to be a reason why that is that isn't purely biological, but also environmental. This is borne out by the fact that there is a MGTOW movement (of note) but not a WGTOW movement (of note - yes, there literally is if you search in Google, but it's not something that's on a magnitude as the men's movement). The phrase "red pill" really refers to the realities of the male existence. Why isn't there a female "red pill"? Red pill/MGTOW are male pushbacks on society, but where is the female pushback? As I say, feminism is absolutely not an equivilant - it's part of the establishment itself.

I think it's worrisome that divorced and otherwise scorned men turn to these antagonistic philosophies to make sense of the world.

These are shaming words. You've already decided "these are irrational voices, because they are scorned - they are not thinking straight, their opinions are therefore invalid". As I say, I'm not an "incel" or scorned, I'm just someone with his eyes open, daring to say what I see. I have been told over and over that I'm a "loser" for daring to say what I see - why is that? Why are such views unpopular?

 

[redpilled]

Of course that's conjoncture, I am just saying that hypothetically some positions are not open to women and that it's because their abilities are in doubt. I am not saying that's on masse what happen...
It is a discussion, you strike me as being à bit rigid.

Hypothetically....conjecture...not saying it's en masse....

I am interested in reality and facts when it comes to these types of discussions. Many feminist myths are created from conjecture and "feelings over facts". I am not interested in feelings over facts. I am interested in facts. I would say I'm very rigid in that respect

 

[kj6723]

I'm considered a "good catch" based on arbitrary attributes (a rich, white guy living in Thailand on a big income and lots of savings)

@shookwun approved

 

[redpilled]

It's easy to understand why it exists: a ton of guys are frustrated as f*** and don't get their needs met by society. But instead of the hard-won answers you'd get from empathy and introspection, they latch onto a mindset that vilifies an entire gender for largely imagined crimes. It's a set of simple answers that holds a strong appeal to a certain group of men because it feeds so specifically into their anger and insecurities.

And I think I've said this before; women want "soft domination" in a relationship. They want the guy to have direction and call the shots but the option to be heard if they want to be.

I would say you need to tackle the ball, not the man. You are describing a group of people in ad hominem style. You could only truly address their issues by....addressing their issues, one at a time. Sctutinise their beliefs and debunk them, if you can. And if you can, fair play to you. But don't call them bitter and frustrated in a derogatory way. Would you call a feminist bitter for campaigning for womens' rights? No, you wouldn't. So why the double standard?

In this particular thread, I asked if there were any "red pill" type female issues in western society. You raised the wage gap and we've debated that and the conclusion was that one study states that women are paid 98% of what men earn when they have "similar" skills in "similar" jobs (your own source). The ONS summarised it was women's choice of type of job and hours worked that contributed to the aggregate pay gap. No other issues have really been put forward other than "women age and have it worse in their 30s" - I would agree with that one by the way, but it's down to biology more than anything else.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

Has anyone checked out some of the MGTOW forums?

At first I was very interested, but after a few days of reading them I actually found that the majority of the men were either incels who hated women because they couldn't get laid, or divorced men who got a bad divorce settlement.

But anyway, I do still like reading about these polar opposites and in some ways its funny seeing feminists scream they have it really bad and then seeing the MGTOW folk scream that men have it far worse.

Its highly amusing if you can remain objective

 

[Medina]

Hypothetically....conjecture...not saying it's en masse....

I am interested in reality and facts when it comes to these types of discussions. Many feminist myths are created from conjecture and "feelings over facts". I am not interested in feelings over facts. I am interested in facts. I would say I'm very rigid in that respect

You raise a good point here that is seldom raised.

The theory that females have introduced "feelings" into politics. Which has lead to the creation of safe spaces, political correctness, sexual politics, virtue signalling etc. Gone are the days of debates. They are now a one-sided affair where you can't disagree without "offending" the opposition. This was unheard of years ago.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

The op deffo seems to be in the latter group. Funny how my mom seems to be the bitter one of the two and my dad never complained. He was back slaying within months lol.

I think a lot of American men get bitter because their divorce settlements can be brutal.

In Europe alimony is illegal (at least it is the UK) but in America it happens quite frequently.

I can see how some of them do become bitter and anti women if they steal your wages when you break up.

 

[redpilled]

I notice you like to reach for the ad hominem. If your only gauge of male frustration is how often a guy gets laid, then...well, I don't suffer from that type of frustration. And come on, really you reduce it down to how often a guy gets laid? Your thinking seems to be....if a guy is sexually satisfied, he sees life through rose-tinted glasses, and no way could he relate to another guy's suffering, or the idea that other men can suffer and that he might even ponder on that suffering. No. The "red pill" has to be someone who's personally suffered. Therefore, you can unlock your ad hominem payload all over him. He's a loser. He needs to get laid....if only he wasn't a loser (tee hee!). What if I had the same view of feminists? So, a feminist must have been denied the vote to understand how important the vote is for women, a feminist must have been raped to understand rape....see how silly your argument sounds? I just see shaming words from you - "get laid son, no need for that kind of talk round these parts. Did I mention you need to get laid?" - let's have an adult debate here.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

Preying on weakness is a human trait, not a female trait.

They let themselves go weak, physically, mentally, legally... And then they complain about their wife who understandably lost all respect for them fucked them over.

A bit of self-awareness please.

Yeah, I agree 100%.

I found MGTOW alluring at first. Maybe it was the whole rejecting women and not caring about if they liked you or not - that did sound quite liberating.

I've tried being single for the past 4 months and purposefully didn't date (I'm going to do it for 2 more months) and I've pretty much come to the conclusion that people - as a whole - are happier in a loving relationship compared to being single.

I believe that this rejection of women is just a coping mechanism that some men use to help cope with being single or divorced

 

[redpilled]

Another thing on the "you must be a loser to have that opinion" is that it's actually quite weak to do the opposite - to suck up to women and take the orthodox feminist view - essentially, to white knight. I think it's weak if you ignore data, but go on "feelings" too. Especially when those feelings always happen to coincide with wanting to please women.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

I notice you like to reach for the ad hominem. If your only gauge of male frustration is how often a guy gets laid, then...well, I don't suffer from that type of frustration. And come on, really you reduce it down to how often a guy gets laid? Your thinking seems to be....if a guy is sexually satisfied, he sees life through rose-tinted glasses, and no way could he relate to another guy's suffering, or the idea that other men can suffer and that he might even ponder on that suffering. No. The "red pill" has to be someone who's personally suffered. Therefore, you can unlock your ad hominem payload all over him. He's a loser. He needs to get laid....if only he wasn't a loser (tee hee!). What if I had the same view of feminists? So, a feminist must have been denied the vote to understand how important the vote is for women, a feminist must have been raped to understand rape....see how silly your argument sounds? I just see shaming words from you - "get laid son, no need for that kind of talk round these parts. Did I mention you need to get laid?" - let's have an adult debate here.

If you hit reply on the post you are answering it will quote who you are speaking to.

I'm not sure if you are speaking to me or zircon here

 

[JohnsonDDG]

Obviously, I can only speak for myself but the male posters arguing against "redpilled" here (bear, Johnson and myself) are pretty moderate in our outlooks and don't subscribe to the orthodox feminist view at all. Bear especially has absorbed a lot from pua, anti-pua, red pill and similar ideologies.

I tend to be quite central on a lot of issues.

Even in politics, we've got this whole left wing versus right wing populism, and I often think both sides can sometimes make excellent points.

 

[redpilled]

Obviously, I can only speak for myself but the male posters arguing against "redpilled" here (bear, Johnson and myself) are pretty moderate in our outlooks and don't subscribe to the orthodox feminist view at all. Bear especially has absorbed a lot from pua, anti-pua, red pill and similar ideologies.

I don't see Bear and Johnson disagreeing with me. They were talking about the MGTOW movement, which I quoted in my original comment. I am not "MTGOW" - I am in a relationship of 2 years and counting.

What we do have in common is that we are major league puss crushers, all three of us. Funny how actual experience with women tends to give you a more moderate viewpoint.

This is so...infantile. I get it though - you think if someone has any kind of criticism of feminism, they must be a virgin. And if you are pro-feminist, you're (ironically) a pussy slayer. OK. Nice to know that.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

If it was plausible that women were being paid less in like-for-like jobs, companies would cease hiring men entirely, and just hire the cheap women to do the same job as efficiently and for a lower price.

No, companies pay men more, pay white people more, pay high-class people more etc etc etc because they incorrectly perceive them as being worth more than they are. You're assuming that there is a kernel of rationality that can overwhelm the bias, but there isn't, or at least it's very rare.

Hollywood is a famous example I've mentioned on this site. Less than 1% of blockbusters have women directors. A lot of unqualified men are hired, a lot of qualified women are never hired. It stays that way due to biases. There are extremely talented women available for cheap, but they're left out.

 

[Medina]

What we do have in common is that we are major league puss crushers, all three of us. Funny how actual experience with women tends to give you a more moderate viewpoint.

How about that guy the other day who made you all look like idiots when he posted proof of his sex life?

No offense but I don't believe that any of you are "puss crushers" with the exception of maybe Johnson who uses tinder a lot

 

[redpilled]

If you hit reply on the post you are answering it will quote who you are speaking to.

I'm not sure if you are speaking to me or zircon here

Just referring to zircon in my quotes. I'm not disagreeing with your opinion on hardcore MGTOW types. I don't want to exclude myself from dating (I'm in a relationship) and/or be bitter about women. However, reality is not either/or. We can still choose to scrutinise how things are and even pose unpopular opinions based on what we see. This should have nothing to do with whether we are dating anyone or not.

 

[redpilled]

No offense but I don't believe that any of you are "puss crushers" with the exception of maybe Johnson who uses tinder a lot

Johnson lives in Vietnam - I'm sure he has tons of options.

 

[Medina]

I posted evidence too.

Very convincing evidence.

Too bad you missed it.

I thought you've been in a relationship for over a year?

The point is men who turn to these things are not always "incel virgins" as zircon somehow believes

 

[JohnsonDDG]

Hollywood is a famous example I've mentioned on this site. Less than 1% of blockbusters have women directors. A lot of unqualified men are hired, a lot of qualified women are never hired. It stays that way due to biases. There are extremely talented women available for cheap, but they're left out.

I actually think male actors are a bigger draw and that is why they earn more.

For whatever reason, having a famous male lead tends to accelerate box office revenue in a way that a famous female lead does not.