Where Is The Female Red Pill Movement?

[Dante92]

I agree with fred and redpilled 100% on this.


All these dislikes for poor zircon. LOL he must be mad.

 

[redpilled]

Let's hear some academics on this topic. Here is Dr. Jordan Peterson, professor of psychology at University of Toronto.

@redpilled @WhitePolarBear @zircon

J Peterson isn't afraid to say it how it is - and I'm sure he's not a virgin or has to pay for sex

Seriously though, let me state the obvious: women are biologically different to men. They take less risks and are less competitive due to lower testosterone. Less risks, less competitiveness = not going the extra mile when a man will. Not all women, it's a generalisation. It's just biology. And biology doesn't stop individuals from achieving goals if they really want to do it. The key is in really wanting it.

 

[pjhair]

J Peterson isn't afraid to say it how it is - and I'm sure he's not a virgin or has to pay for sex

Seriously though, let me state the obvious: women are biologically different to men. They take less risks and are less competitive due to lower testosterone. Less risks, less competitiveness = not going the extra mile when a man will. Not all women, it's a generalisation. It's just biology. And biology doesn't stop individuals from achieving goals if they really want to do it. The key is in really wanting it.

That can plausibly be one reason behind the wage gap. Another reason, which has already been brought up on this thread, is the kind of profession they choose. Some may argue that women choose certain professions due to environmental and cultural factors. But this argument doesn't explain why in societies where these cultural factors have been reduced to zero or close to it, the gender gap in occupations seems to get even wider. I have seen some solid data for it but I am too lazy to look it up right now. So I will post another video by Jordan Peterson in which he talks about the relevant data. If you don't want to watch the whole video, watch it from 5:58.

 

[Medina]

many decades of men keeping women 'down' and in their place..
.

Keeping women down from what darling? Working in a coal mine? You understand that work was a dangerous place where men died? When the strength of a mans back was actually worth something, women had little interest in doing a mans job.

But show me one poster with "No women allowed" and I might believe they had it as hard as others. Or even as hard as the common man who broke his back building The Titanic so that classy New York ladies like yourself could sip Chardonnay over the Atlantic.

And of course, we all know whose lives were prioritized when the ship went down

 

[yetti]

Seriously though, let me state the obvious: women are biologically different to men. They take less risks and are less competitive due to lower testosterone.

It is true. And oh how we suffer for it! All the wars men have started due to their competitive nature and desire to take risks, and the foolish and cruel decisions that have killed hundreds of millions. Personally I'd like to see women running every country and religious organization in the world.

 

[JeanLucBB]

It is true. And oh how we suffer for it! All the wars men have started due to their competitive nature and desire to take risks, and the foolish and cruel decisions that have killed hundreds of millions. Personally I'd like to see women running every country and religious organization in the world.

Hillary Clinton?

 

[yetti]

Hillary Clinton?

She wouldn't be my first choice, but yes I'd choose her (and did) over the present occupant.

Sure you can reel off a list of women you think would have some desire to fight a war. Also some women actually pick up a gun and commit a robbery or a rape. What a rarity though, the list of men is so much longer. Due in part, as redpilled pointed out, to their much more competitive nature, desire to take risks, and also perhaps a more common predilection amongst men for cruelty.

 

[yetti]

Women do not make good natural leaders

Wow. Well it's good that you've let everyone know where you stand!

I'd give you a "dislike" the way you gave me one, but it's just silly. You're entitled to your opinion.

Sorry, but I don't know of many female Pol Pots, Hitlers, and Stalins. etc. etc. etc. I think hundreds of millions less people would have been slaughtered in human history without competitive, risky, cruel male leadership.

 

[Dench57]

 

[yetti]

Give me one example of good female leadership.

LOL... there are long lists of effective female leaders past and present, you can google them if you seriously cannot think of a single female leader you respect. Maybe you think they're all bad, that's fine I guess.
https://www.forbes.com/power-women/list/

And dude, I'd say, killing thousands or millions of people, something many many many male leaders have done, is pretty awful. You say:

"Don't underestimate women's capacity for violence and cruelty, they're right up there with men."

but it's just wrong. I assume you must know how to get information on your own, but here's a cut and paste from a website about women and mass killing. Don't you know this?

And mass killings, even more so than other types of violence, are overwhelmingly a male phenomenon. Female mass killers are "so rare that it just hasn't been studied," said James Garbarino, a psychologist at Loyola University Chicago who has researched human development and violence. "There aren't enough cases."

 

[Dench57]

Give me one example of good female leadership.

Margaret Thatcher.

 

[Guzam]

Wow. Well it's good that you've let everyone know where you stand!

I'd give you a "dislike" the way you gave me one, but it's just silly. You're entitled to your opinion.

Sorry, but I don't know of many female Pol Pots, Hitlers, and Stalins. etc. etc. etc. I think hundreds of millions less people would have been slaughtered in human history without competitive, risky, cruel male leadership.

How does it feel to be emasculated and guilt-tripped?
You're a male ffs, YOU are what's bad in this world! Just kill yourself and leave this world to women and minorities! That will be the perfect world.

 

[yetti]

Margaret Thatcher.

Tsai Ing-wen.

Aung San Suu Kyi.

There are many...

 

[Guzam]

Tsai Ing-wen.

Aung San Suu Kyi.

There are many...

loool please tell me you're gay your posts make me want to c*m profusely inside your pinky hole

 

[yetti]

loool please tell me you're gay your posts make me want to c*m profusely inside your pinky hole

LOL, what do you have against Tsai Ing-wen and Aung San Suu Kyi? I wonder if you have any idea who they are.

 

[Dench57]

LOL, what do you have against Tsai Ing-wen and Aung San Suu Kyi? I wonder if you have any idea who they are.

were they in Star Wars?

 

[yetti]

were they in Star Wars?

LOL. No...

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I think many of them are plugged into the same information streams. I'm thinking especially of red pill blogs like RooshV and chateauhertiste, and reactionary/alt-right youtubers like SargonOfAkkad and thunderf00t.

You can recognize it instantly by the "here I'll show you some evidence and reason you ever tried that you dumb b**ch" overtones. And by the subsequent crumpling whenever you make the least bit of informed pushback. See Sargons debate against Kristi Winters for reference.

I'm kind of glad that I'm not familiar with those communities.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Yep, there were no women in the Russian army during World War II.

Don't underestimate women's capacity for violence and cruelty, they're right up there with men.

Women do not make good natural leaders, just like men don't make good natural primary caregivers.

Angela Merkel pretty much runs Germany (and Europe to an extent). Well, that's going pretty well so far.

Merkel is probably the best leader in the G7.

Best of a bad lot lol.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

LOL... there are long lists of effective female leaders past and present, you can google them if you seriously cannot think of a single female leader you respect. Maybe you think they're all bad, that's fine I guess.
https://www.forbes.com/power-women/list/

And dude, I'd say, killing thousands or millions of people, something many many many male leaders have done, is pretty awful. You say:

"Don't underestimate women's capacity for violence and cruelty, they're right up there with men."

but it's just wrong. I assume you must know how to get information on your own, but here's a cut and paste from a website about women and mass killing. Don't you know this?

And mass killings, even more so than other types of violence, are overwhelmingly a male phenomenon. Female mass killers are "so rare that it just hasn't been studied," said James Garbarino, a psychologist at Loyola University Chicago who has researched human development and violence. "There aren't enough cases."

I can't tell if you're serious in arguing that female heads of state would be less aggressive.

Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state was one of the most belligerent in history, and she ran on a war platform. She was likely the first Democratic candidate to sweep the neocon faction. Robert Kagan was gushing with praise for Hillary"s militarism.

Women are just as vicious as men, sometimes more so.