The Red Pill

It’s not one or the other and redpill doesn’t focus exclusively on casual sex. I would argue happiness can come from either or be found entirely outside the paradigm of intersexual dynamics. It’s simply a tool that allows people to navigate the sexual marketplace more effectively without false expectations and oneitis.

 

The thing is, you are talking about a lot of «studies» but you do not link any research paper or at least a book wrote by a trusty researcher nor an known academy that directly confirms your theories.

You mix convenient truths with apparent logic assumptions to create "conclusions backed up by science",so yes, you have science in your favor but when it's most convenient for you.

I think you are trapped in a confirmation bias black hole you cannot escape easily... it seems that red pill was actually an entrance to the matrix, and not the escape of it.

 

Even if he were to do that, that would not necessarily confirm the theory. It would only provide evidence for said theory.

Meanwhile, the Redpill-endorsed conclusions extrapolated from such studies, such as "All Women are Whores" - in no way help or rehabilitate anyone, nor do they increase happiness, nor do they promote a healthy society in any way. And on top of that, they are simply false.

So far this young man has asserted that humans naturally have 4-7 sexual partners (which in no way demonstrates that we can't or shouldn't be monogamous), compared us to other "monogamous" animals (of which he hasn't named a single one or why that comparison is relevant to anything), told us that all women change their dating preferences at exactly age 29-31, and asserted personal things like saying that I have an ego issue or that I agree with feminism and the MSM. And he hasn't proven or at least tried to demonstrate a single one of these claims. On top of ALL THAT, he claims to have assumed nothing.

If someone is repelled by the generally accepted rules of debate and logic, it's this guy.

 

The funny thing is that HE IS ACTUALLY RIGHT!!

He is not assuming anything. He believes that what he says is the truth because someone else convinced him of it. So he repeats those assumptions like a parrot.

And a parrot does not need to verify or doubt what is told to repeat it anyways.

 

This one word makes me dismiss everything you say as useless. You are too warped in your lust-addled brains to think straight.

 

That’s two words

 

Dude I already went over this IN THIS THREAD. Read Hormonal by “Dr. Martie Haselton phd is the worlds leading researcher on how ovulatory cycles influence a woman’s sexuality. She is a professor of psychology at UCLA and the Institute for Society and Genetics, edited the leading journal in the field, Evolution and Human Behavior, and directs the evolutionary psychology lab at UCLA.” You can also just Wikipedia ovulatory shift, this is the process of women’s mate preferences changing from dominant men to submissive men throughout her menstrual cycle. You don’t have to call it redpill. If that causes too much vitriol then let’s not call it redpill. We’ll call it evolutionary psychology. What exactly do you think redpill is and what exactly do you not agree with? Read “The Evolution of Desire” by David Buss who is an evolutionary psychologist. Read “The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature” by Matt Ridley, “Is a popular science book exploring the evolutionary psychology of sexual selection. The Red Queen was one of seven books shortlisted for the -
1994 Rhône-Poulenc prize that was eventually won by Steve Jones’ The Language of Genes. Read Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality by Christopher Ryan, this book argues how playful promiscuous sex was important in the development of human social bonds in hunter gatherer societies.

 

You can also just search sperm competition on Wikipedia and scroll down to the section on primates and read how it says that larger genital size is selected for in more promiscuous apes. It then goes on to explain how gorillas are largely monogamous and therefore have very small genitals for apes and how humans who are promiscuous have larger genitals but not as large as bonobos who are the most promiscuous apes. Gorillas have no sperm competition and a gorilla penis is the size of an average pinky finger. The apes that are not monogamous such as humans have been selected to have longer penises to bypass the sperm that is in the vagina already from another mate. The first pump of ejaculate actually contains an enzyme which kills foreign sperm which is further sperm competition in humans hinting at non monogamy. Even the shape of the human penis is selected for through sperm competition, in the book I mentioned Sex at Dawn there is evidence that the penis hooks upwards and the glans is shaped to shovel out the sperm of other males who’ve previously mated. Females also have concealed estrous which means they do not show outward signs of ovulation such as swelling and this is so sex can be had by multiple partners throughout the month without giving away when the high fertility window is. During high fertility(proliferative phase) though she is looking for dominant behavior and physical attractiveness see Hormonal by Dr. Haselton above, during low fertility(luteal phase) she is looking for comfort and provisioning. Concealed estrous keeps the secret of who is getting the reproductive benefit.

 

And have any of you even stopped to consider that the reason you are on this site is because pornography hijacks the innate need for men to spread their seed with MULTIPLE PARTNERS. That’s the whole idea behind the Coolidge Effect. We have a biological drive to seek out novel sexual mates and all of you have followed your biology to the point where you have a big enough problem seeking out multiple virtual partners that you sought help on a forum. You can now say you all want to be monogamous and great, more power to you. We have that ability to an extent. It’s not our innate wiring though and the Coolidge Effect demonstrates this. If you don’t know what the Coolidge effect is wtf are you doing btw go watch Gary Wilson’s Ted Talk, The Great Porn Experiment.

 

I wonder if I should tell this guy what an appeal to nature fallacy is...

 

Appeal to nature is claiming that something is either good or bad because it’s natural. I’m doing neither, I’m simply stating how it is and allowing moral judgements to be placed however you see fit. I see no inherent problem with humans innate sexuality. If they see a problem with it they can control it if they like and follow their own moral guidelines. Just don’t be surprised if your oneitis fantasy doesn’t play out how you idealized it would.

 

At this point I’ve listed multiple resources on the evolution of human sexuality and mating patterns. You can look into ovulatory shift and sperm competition as a start. If that doesn’t satisfy you then read any of the 4 books I’ve listed above, 2 of which were witten by leading evolutionary psychologists, and provide a counter argument or just assert that I’m making a moral judgement that I’m not making. I get the feeling that you are the one making an appeal that human sexuality is bad. If evidence is presented that humans are promiscuous then that is a bad thing or that evidence must be false, is this your stance?

 

So you're not saying whether humans should or shouldn't be monogamous? You don't mind either way?

 

Why would I mind? Idgaf what other people do in the bedroom. I just think humans are far less monogamous than we are led to believe by society and that the redpill allows people to not be let down by false expectations of how their relationship will turn out.

 

So what is the conclusion?

We are genetically speaking, more promiscuous than the society tells us... or at least Western societies.

So, as a woke man (thanks to the red pill), should I go and plant my seed in every woman I can?, that's what my ancestors did anyways... it's not like they didn't had all the resources and possibilities that modern societies provide, they didn't had a lot of kids in order to maintain a good number of descendants taking in mind the harsh environment they fought every day (predators, deadly illnesses, scarce resources, lethal temperatures depending on the season). I shouldn't take account of those things, they were humans anyways, what could be the difference between them and us anyways, it's not like if the internet, modern economy, better literacy, social media, medicine, electricity and all the other modern inventions affect our lives.

Modern times do not need modern strategies... what? What we need is to go back to the principles of the macho macho cavemen. We should be like the alphas in this super wolf-pack we call society. An alpha man should spread his seed to every corner on the earth, the sexual marketplace allows it as there are more women than men, every man should at least get laid with 7 women. THE NUMBERS SAY IT. It is our mathematically and statistically proved right, because we demand balance.

I should start to seduce with every woman I can right away, does it matter what they think? Of course not because it's already scientifically proved that in their genes they are the passive player in the game. As in the past the men were the hunters and the women the caregivers, who else could take care of my children while I go and hunt deers in the forest, well, no I do not have the need to go hunting and I do not have children either... but anyways... maybe one day.

We need submissive women to take care of us, while we do the work, they do not need rights as we already provide them of everything they need... soulsearching, competitive careers, ambitions and merits should only be permitted for the one that has a peepee, as he is the macho macho alpha food gatherer.

It doesn't matter all those years when women fought for enough rights to participate in our society as active member of it. Thanks to it now in tinder they choose to sleep with every Chad they see because genetically speaking they are more prone to have sex with every alpha chad they see around. What? A woman choosing who to have sex with? The math is already done!!! Seven women for one man!!! The opposite is inadmissible!!!.

Hehehe just kidding.

Red Pill disproves a lie... with another lie. But whatever. To me RP is the equivalent to what they call feminazis.

I going to read all those sources, they seem interesting.

 

I’m sorry dude but I didn’t really follow that. I think you just made up a bunch of stuff, I think you have assumptions about what redpill is and there are a lot of spheres within the redpill space, some of which I’m not a fan of and others which I find very helpful and informative and have improved my life more than I could convey. If you start researching evolutionary psychology you will most likely stumble upon some uncomfortable truths that will challenge the conventional narrative you have grown up with. These are discussed heavily within the redpill community and people discuss how to navigate their relationships and protect themselves so they don’t get blind sided with a breakup or zeroed out in a divorce. People within these communities discuss their problems and offer solutions, is some of it toxic and/or unhelpful? Yeah a ton of it is. I would also argue that some of the best life advice I’ve heard or implemented has been through redpill communities.

 

YES!!! YES!!! EXACTLY!!! GOD LORD... YEEEEEES!!!

Well, that sounds pretty convenient, isn't it?

---

Look, honestly, my problem are not the facts that redpillers use to justify their theories, nor the search of the knowledge and strategies necessary to adapt better to our society, neither the impulse to defy the broken paradigms that are imposed by our society and could be obsolete by now.

Heck, I do all those things, I think that at certain point of our lives we feel the need to understand ourselves and our environment better, we want to have a vision of the world that gives us the power to have a wholesome and happy life.

My problem is with the dogmatic approach redpill uses, the lingo, the "knowledge" or "facts" you first have to justify in order to have a different vision of life and society, the misoginy, etc.

If you think that "redpill" is just a philosophy you are wrong. Red Pill is a movement that is almost a cult on his own, with leaders and all.

Fisher, the founder of the movement was infamous for sentences like this one:

“I treat women like they're subordinate creatures, and suddenly they respect me,” Fisher wrote in 2013.

"I’m going to say it- Rape isn’t an absolute bad, because the rapist I think probably likes it a lot. I think he’d say it’s quite good, really."

and other members like Rollo Tomasi

“Women who want to fuck will find a way to fuck.”
― Rollo Tomassi

Well, yeah! Duh, I do that too, I'm a man so what's the mistic point?. You search about this individual and all his knowledge is linked to women. Women are this, women are that, yada yada. why? Why someone has to talk shi* about the opposite gender... or about any other person in general?. That's childish I say.

Threads like this one:

Three ways to consciously manipulate women before they subconsciously manipulate you.

or this one

Now I am become Chad, the destroyer of pu**y.

Those are top articles in the redpill forum.

Look at this darn lingo:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Manosphere_glossary

--

You could say that I'm being picky with the articles I link... but again, the problem is not the truth that RP gives you. Yes the legal system is usually in favor of women (altought not all the time), yes we as male are taught to protect and provide women, yes there are paradigms that we need to understand first to gain freedom.

Those are problems that need to be solved, and we MUST solve them.

But, why all the hate? why all the ranting? Why all the women are the perpetrators? why all the males are the victims? why all the men that are not in favor of RP have to be beta femminist... waaaat?

The problem is the attitude most redpillers acquire... they become what they initially hated, proving that redpill movement is in essence all about getting laid.

All the wisdom RP "shares" was there even before the movement, and the philosophical approaches existed even before RP too. The thing is redpillers use all the motivation and knowledge to become... chads. haha the irony.

When you tell me that RP has a lot of spheres and you do not like some of them, then you are in denial. Again, RP is a movement, not a philosophy, RP wants to change the society in favor of men, but instead of finding equality of rights between the two genders... even instead of creating roles for men and women in modern societies... males HAVE TO BE the dominant ones, and women HAVE TO BE submmisive. But why? Oh yeah, because our prehistoric ancestors were like that. That's the dangerous part.

You can't justify the whole movement just because a portion of it. The one you like the most. The "good one". Either you are in denial, or you do not have complete understanding of what redpill represents.

.

Well this was fun, but it's time to stop for me.
Thanks for the discussion guys.

 

So the spheres I’m talking about oppose each other generally, you have mgtow, pick up artists(right there you have opposites) then you have the MRA’s or men’s rights activists, then there is the black pill which basically says to just give up on dating because they are ugly, similar to mgtow in a way. Then you have people like Dr. Robert Glover who wrote No More Mr. Nice Guy about male codependency and Dr. Shawn T. Smith, a clinical psychologist who wrote the Tactical Guide to Women and talks a lot about mitigating risk in relationships and opposes the APAs categorization of conventional masculinity as a mental disorder and has a show with Entrepreneur Richard Cooper called Before the Trainwreck where they try to help young guys in business and relationships. Then you have pick up artists who, think what you may, will teach you priceless information on flirting and bantering and maintaining frame in the face of shit tests and congruency tests. Tom Torero is somebody I’ve learned a ton from and as I’m typing this I just got a bj in a parking lot outside my work and was my first successful o since my last relapse in October 2018. I know I would’ve never done that without hearing about his “secret society” talks. The girl practically forced herself on me and all I did was banter with her leading up to it and I knew what nonverbal things to look for without having to discuss it at all beforehand, in fact there was no discussion just body language. Puas teach a lot about body language which is something I was completely blind to prior to discovering the redpill. I’m getting off topic but all I know is it’s helped me a lot in becoming a more confident guy and not expect every girl I meet to be the love of my life or expect anything from them.

 

The thing is that you're omitting a lot of red pill doctrine. If TRP was simply about helping guys receive more oral sex and then brag about it on internet forums, that would be fine. I'm more interested in the statements endorsed by Redpill editors, such as "all women are whores," as @glasgow said above.

 

I would hardly say I’m bragging about it and this is supposed to be a place to share progress with rebooting. If you knew my back story of having pied in every sexual encounter from 17 to 26 and just coming out of a year long flatline I doubt you would consider that bragging. There is no redpill doctrine. Who said all women were whores? I watch redpill content everyday and have never heard those words mentioned, maybe from an incel who is redpill aware but that’s not me or any of the people I learn from. Just because you have a problem with something you heard before doesn’t mean there is nothing to be gained as far as truth. Even if everything someone says is false other than one piece of information which was novel and helpful it wouldn’t nullify that information. Rollo Tomassi direct quote “The redpill is not about hating women it is about not hating them for what they can never be to you”