Alexander Grace is based

A good channel for male self-improvement (anti-porn, chivalry, fitness/bodybuilding, reading and education) is ‘The Golden One’. A real Viking warrior, redpilled as they come.

 

Boi, there are tons of legit Redpill Channels out there from Alex Becker, to Better Bachelor, to Thinking Ape, etc... All high quality content.

 

My recommendation would be to stop thinking in stereotypes. Men and women alike are individuals and social interactions are more than mere games of showcasing value. There isn't serious psychological research backing up the theories of the red pill community. (At least all of them.) I used to watch this guys videos and I'd recall he wasn't as bad and hateful as people would like to paint the red pill community being. However I'd recall feeling paranoid and resentful whenever I'd binge watch his stuff. It's a dangerous rabbit hole of half truths, unprovable claims and outright lies to fall into.

But that's just my experience on the issue.

 

See the thing is, most of red pill channels insights and experiences, the more detailed they are they are also likely not match to where you live, what you do, etc... there will be a disconnect, at the same time, you Dont wanna fall into the pitfalls of watching Commercialized MGTOW Redpill Rage shit like channels like Sandman produce.

Thinking Ape was helpful in Nofap Rationalization, Alex Becker for investment advice and upgrading my health and adopting minimalist mentality, Better Bachelor is just a reminder bell to stay 10 feet away from Courts and Lawyers and crazy women (AKA search for the Red flags early on in any relationship).

Any Red pill Channel worth their salt, will focus on something specific and deliver it to you, vague messages, commercialized "Sandsellers" and the like are atrocious Red Pill Channels.

 

Sorry, but I find this highly non-based. Just watched his "One Way Street" video. He paraphrases one piece of data (the OKcupid meme you are guaranteed to see if you spend 5 minutes on incels.co) without reference and concludes "this confirms [redpill theory]". Asserts countless other conclusions without proof. Uses undefined terms like "top tier men". Makes unsupported sweeping generalizations i.e. "male sexuality is viewed as perverted" without any context. Here, let's take a look at some of his faulty logic (timestamp 3:39 if you want to follow along):


"According to okcupid, 80% of men are rated to be below average. Figures like this confirm what evolutionary biologists have been saying for years: that women only have eyes for the top tier men." -- firstly, we have an undefined term: "top tier men" - what does this even mean? Also, this is an example of hand-waving, or stating a conclusion without proper justification. One study does not "confirm" a theory - at best it supports it, and even that hasn't been shown. The phrase "figures like this" implies that there is more data, but only one paraphrased, non-linked study has been given.

"... where does this leave the 80% of men who can't get women to even look at them?" -- again, so much is assumed and so little is proven. How do we know that 80% of men "can't get women to look at them"? This is also hand-waving.

"Too often, it leaves them with depression, loneliness, and resentment." -- lack of rigorous terminology and no indication of why this matters or is a problem. How often is "too often?" Who, if anyone, is responsible for reducing this depression, loneliness, and resentment, and through which means? Why is it problematic that negative emotions tend to follow rejection?

"From a purely biological perspective, one of the best indicators of your success as a biological organism is your ability to attract a partner, mate with them, and pass on your genes. Is it surprising that men who struggle to attract women into their lives feel like they are failures?" -- again, where do we go from this? We have that "muh study proves women only want the top tier dicky --> the bottom 80% have a harder time getting the poosy --> not getting laid sucks". Ok, I'm on board. Now I'm sure he will offer some kind of a conclusion that follows all these premises, right? Something along the lines of "Therefore, men/women/society should..."

... NOPE! He just stops there and moves immediately to the next topic. This dude makes descriptive claim after descriptive claim about "unique male difficulties" and offers nothing in the way of normative claims. Not even a tasty little hint of a suggestion as to what we should do to mitigate these difficulties.


Redpill is a gateway drug to inceldom.

 

u got it boss, thanks for reading my shitrant