IJB063
Member-
Content count
646 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by IJB063
-
-
On 24/05/2020 at 4:43 AM, Freakyboo said:Re the Libertarian Cringe Video: "The old 'who will build roads.' We don't need Government to build roads." I'm sure the kind-hearted corporations will build them for us.
You know who’ll build the roads in a libertarian society - the people who build roads now
You know who’ll pay for the roads in a libertarian society - the people that want to use roads
All libertarianism does is take the middle man, which is government, out of the equation
The idea that we can have supermarkets stocked with food, with no government master plan of tax redistribution to have these supermarkets, and that all the people working there are there of their own volition, but what freedom can’t do is build a flat place is fucking stupid
Books have been wrote on the subject of how we can build roads in a libertarian society
-
Doing what?
-
2 minutes ago, Arcangelo said:Wrong
Wrong
The redpill is true.
Hypergamy is a real thing.
No buddy, you’re wrong, and would you care to elaborate, as to why I’m wrong
The first use of the term red pill come from the PUA community, straight after the Matrix came out
Some of the Red pill is true, some of it is bullshit, it depends on what you mean by red pill
Hypergamy seems pretty logical to me
-
@Preety_India
First, good stuff, appreciate the long winded response, it’s probably gonna take me a while to chip through it but fuck it1 hour ago, Preety_India said:How do you know this is the truth? Whatever they say about female nature, it doesn't apply to me at all or to any female I've known. Their opinions on women are very low. It's like they don't even know women. Maybe they're fucking lampposts before.
From my life experience, deductive reasoning and the evidence that has been presented to me, I have what I believe to be the truth
And who are they?The fucking borg lol
These guys aren’t a hive mind
There a collection of different people which are united under the red pill really just because that’s what they identify as, the red pill is a very ambiguous term that many people see differently
Who doesn’t like to fuck the occasional lamppost?
1 hour ago, Preety_India said:Social conditioning stems from men's egoic needs. Society was constructed for what men wanted. If it had run according to woman's wishes, things today would have been very different. Maybe all these whiny alphas would have gotten some females by now.
Not gonna lie, reading this pissed me off lol
So I’ve just come back after writing what I’ve written below and it’s quite a fucking lot, if I can’t be bothered to continue, I think there’s enough on the bone of whats beneath to set you rabid so I’ll probably come back tomorrow and respond to what you’ve written
Social conditioning comes from society’s needs, “society was constructed for what men wanted”. Is that why dozens of young men throughout history have thrown away there lives in the meat grinder of war for there mothers, sister, daughters. Men love and die for there women and put there women above them, and that’s the expectation of men, to throw away there lives and go down with the ship to save the women, save there women even at the expense of fucking children in some cases.Here’s very simple biology that you should be able to grasp easily
Ill start with an example
When youre in the boys scouts, and you're being led through a rural wooded area, by some sort of authority figure/adult, for a day out. You will be told if you get lost from the group, to sit down and wait.
Why?
Because the group will realise that you're missing and retrace their foot steps to find you.
If you instead panic and walk to try and find them, you may drift further away from them, you'll expel important energy. You might get lost more so.
Women historically, for biological reasons, as they are more important for the promulgation of the species, have been more likely to be in a position were someone will come back and look for them.
Men historically for biological reasons, as they are less important for the promulgation of the species, have been less likely to be in a position were someone will look for them.
Why?
Because for the continuation of the species men are less important than women.
50 Women + 50 Men = 50 Babies every nine months
50 Women + 1 Man = 50 Babies every nine months
1 Woman + 50 Men = 1 Baby every nine months
So, continuing with the boy scout, lost in the woods scenario.
Women will evolve through selection to be more dependent, collective, submissive etc...
Men will evolve through selection to be more independent, individualist, dominant etc...
As the woman will rely more on the group for survival.
As the man will rely more on himself for survival.
Now tell me what deductively is wrong with this logic? Don’t ignore this question, and isn’t it logical to assume from this, that this is the reason we have different traits and behaviours.
You want to know the reason why we actually have social conditioning, culture and societies, because of our collective striving to fulfil our own biological imperatives, meaning what we perceive to be in our best interest from the primordial brain. This is where our values come from and why we impose on others certain rules as to maximise our own self interests.
Time marked below is this video which links to the my point by Actualised.org.
50:20 time markThe prime self interest is passing on our genes aka the Darwinian imperative, that’s why we have society, it’s not some evil cabal for men’s benefit, and to believe that shows such terms utter ignorance and lack of human empathy to men that it is just gross, but really I don’t expect any better. And you know how you best insure you pass on genes, you prioritise women, and women delude themselves into believing that they’re not prioritised to make it just that much easier to insure that they remain that way.
Women are more important for the continuation of the species than men, therefore every society has prioritised them throughout all of fucking history. And women collectively have evolved an innate solipsism and stockholm syndrome, where they will never grasp how men break their backs for their benefit. And men should never expect them to have empathy, because they’re in cable of giving it.
“Women think in their hearts that the man business is to make money and it is hers to spend it” - Arthur Schopenhauer
Theres a reason I asked you to do that experiment, because maybe you’d see the imposed social contract, and see that men by fucking far get a shitter deal, but no, somehow society is built for our benefit at the expense of yours. That disconnect from reality and the inherent entitlement that comes with that is disgusting.
When I originally posted this I intended to only talk about the relational and sexual aspects of the red pill. That why I put it in this section. Not all of society but fuck it.
You know why women collectively haven’t ran society ever, in all of human history, in every single country on the face of the earth. Why it’s always us evil men that do everything solely for our benefit and at the expense of yours. Because women are in cable of running society. They lack the testicular fortitude, no matter how much fish bicycle and karate cop girl you’ll never, reach the standard of men.
“If civilisation had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts” - Camille Paglia
Heres a link to a webpage on Vervent monkeys, if you’re still reading and not frothing at the mouth
https://phys.org/news/2016-11-female-monkeys-wile-rally-troops.html
Female vervet monkeys manipulate males into fighting battles by lavishing attention on brave soldiers while giving noncombatants the cold shoulder, researchers said.
As in humans, it turns out, social incentives can be just as big a driver for male monkeys to go to war as the resources they stand to gain from fighting, whether it be territory or food.
"Ours is the first study to demonstrate that any non-human species use manipulative tactics, such as punishment or rewards, to promote participation in intergroup fights," study co-author Jean Arseneau, a primate specialist of the University of Zurich, told AFP.
It's all about sex, the researchers believe.
"Receiving punishment" for not taking part in battles "could damage the... male's social relationship(s)" with females in the group, the researchers wrote.
Now why don't female vervet monkeys fight themselves?
Because female vervet monkeys are the weaker sex, given sexual dimorphism because of this basic divergence of sexual importance to who is more important in promulgation.
Why do female monkeys use sex and affection as rewards to combative monkeys?
Because a female monkeys primary asset is her sexuality to other male monkeys.
Because the way a male monkey best fulfils his mating strategy is via capitulation to the females.
Women are the selectors and men are the selected.
Men compete for women.
Ans that competition keeps the gears of society turning. But it’s all for women, because there more important to keep this shit show in motion, if you think the vervent monkeys are stupid example here’s a human comparison, a comparison that clearly shows how us evil men made society to oppress the sugar and spice all things nice women.
The white feather campaign, where women and feminists would go up to any man not in uniform and hand them a white feather of cowardice. Many of these men who were given the white feather of cowardice and could not enlist killed themselves from the shame, such as men who could not join the war for their disabilities committed suicide for example. Young men collectively shamed by women into going to die, be mutilated and gassed in trenches and foxholes for years. Side note - even the men who could enlist and were shamed into in a sense were too committing suicide by joining a senseless war. Here is an article below relating to this
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/nov/11/first-world-war-white-feather-cowardice
Now why is this, because from a biological standpoint, for man to best fulfil his mating strategy, he needed to, like the vervet monkey, maintain high social standing to have receptive mates. He did this via capitulating to women's demands to kill threats and to gather resources. Because as mentioned previously, women are the selectors and men are the selected. This reminds me of a study which shows men's brains are shown to prioritise sex over food.
This most likely being because males who had higher sex drives and were more willing to prioritise sex over other needs were more likely to copulate and pass on those similar genes.
"Man strives in everything for a direct domination over things, either by comprehending or by subduing them. But woman is everywhere and always relegated to a merely indirect domination, which is achieved by means of man, who is consequently the only thing she has to dominate directly." - Arthur Schopenhauer
Women are along for the ride, men are in the drivers seat, but where driving where women want to go. Not for fucking men, that’s why some men have a low opinion of women, because they don’t deserve our respect, you’re not entitled to our respect, men intuitively know that they’re not entiltled to respect, that’s why they earn it, I respect people on an individual level, person to person, you don’t automatically get a high opinion because you have a cu**
In dare you to endure the remaining minutes of this youtube video, I doubt that you can
Well I’m done with this shit today, it’s 11pm and I got shit to do tomorrow, when I get an opportunity tomorrow I’ll respond to what you’ve previously written
-
-
I’m not saying necessarily to disrespect women, what I was saying is women don’t find you respecting them to be sexy, and they do find disrespect to be sexy.
12 minutes ago, ajasatya said:It was a very dark period and it felt horrible everyday.
If you feel horrible doing it, then you’re not actually an asshole, so you weren’t genuine. You were playing a character of the asshole, you weren’t actually an asshole.
There’s a Freudian theory of state transference, that most communication is not just via language but it also involves your emotional state. That’s why if two guys approach a girl both with the same pick up line, but ones shy and ones confident. Who do you thinks gonna get the better reaction?
Women are built to smell out men are bullshitting them, and the entire idea of the creep is when there bullshit detectors go of.
Women are much better at state transference than men, and women are much better in finding out who you really are and cutting through the bullshit.
If it wasn’t genuine women probably found that out, so didn’t take you seriously. The only ones that did were already the ones that had a low self esteem and ego, which was easy to prey on because they were already in a weaker state.
12 minutes ago, ajasatya said:Whilst behaving as a dickhead to attract women may seem like an advantage, it's not
Dont behave like a dickhead, become a dickhead.
But I’m not saying be a dickhead, unless you want to fuck lots of beautiful young women.
If instead you want a monogamous relationship, you can’t be constantly be playing mind games with her. A woman’s quality is a reflection of a mans quality.
I recommend being a dickhead for those who want lots of meaningless sex with young women.
12 minutes ago, ajasatya said:When I decided to change and respect women, while still maintaining the sense of high self value, I didn't attract less women. I started to attract more healthy women, which felt like I was attracting more women.
Yeah, probably cause you weren’t bullshitting them anymore, women hate bullshiters. If you were actually an asshole you probs would of had better results.
12 minutes ago, ajasatya said:I am now a very happy man, married with an amazing woman. Time will tell you.
Good stuff buddy ?
Hope that marriage stuff works out
We shall see
-
44 minutes ago, ajasatya said:So yes, it is about having options and being confident. But being confident and arrogant are two very different things.
People struggle to tell the difference between arrogance and confidence and to quote Henry the Fifth
“Self-love is not so great a sin as self-neglect.”
-
53 minutes ago, ajasatya said:It has absolutely nothing to do with being "better" or "worse", whatever that means.
We perceive some people to have higher status and be more desirable and in a twisted way even fundamentally better than others
Im not saying with better or worse in terms of a persons humanity.
But do we collectively treat celebrities on par with the homeless, no of course we don’t, should we? Maybe
53 minutes ago, ajasatya said:The effect that you're talking about happens to men and women. It's about feeling attraction to hard targets, not necessarily assholes. You can be incredibly respectful and still cause a sense of immense value to women just by portraying yourself as a hard target.
No, it doesn’t happen to men, this only happens to women
Its true that people desire what they can’t have, but men aren’t attracted to women that treat them like shit because they treat them like shit
Because men and women have different instincts
You may find this fact offensive but women are weaker than men, and on a primitive level seek men to protect them
So as you said, if a mans an asshole, what does that do, it triggers in a woman’s hind brain a threat to her survival, which then triggers her instinct to seek a male for protection, how does a woman persuade men to protect them?
Ill leave that up to you to figure out
And who’s gonna be that man that she “persuades” to protect her, the asshole of course
Respecting a woman isn’t going to trigger that primordial reaction
Obviously this doesn’t work if you want a stable relationship, constantly treating your woman like dirt because they grow tired of the constant anxiety
The flip side example of this would be to imagine a rich ugly man, who has a beautiful gold digging girlfriend who uses him for his money. Eventually the sex will become stale (which was the gold diggers only asset) and the man will break up the relationship.
I wasnt saying that you need to be an asshole/dickhead to have a relationship, in fact it works against a long term relationship.
But respect is definitely not sexy to a woman, disrespect is much more.
The reason men don’t find disrespect from a woman attractive is because our survival isn’t threatened if we don’t have a woman in our lives, because we don’t need women to protect us, in fact, disrespect from a woman is unattractive to men.
-
5 minutes ago, h inandout said:Well, as someone who wound up with one of those dickheads and destroyed my life as a result, I can sincerely say, I regret that.
Sorry to hear that
5 minutes ago, h inandout said:I wish my mom had taught me it's okay to pursue relationships, then I wouldn't have had to wait for a literal con artist before I opened up to the idea of dating.
No offence, I believe its the role of the father not the mother to give her daughter a positive male role model in her life, so that his daughter knows what to accept and not accept in men, thats why they call it daddy issues
7 minutes ago, h inandout said:I also wish the way more awesome young men around me hadn't chased me away by saying unnecessary shit like, "I'm better than you at math." Or, "Seriously, condoms aren't necessary," or really even just neglecting to date me properly.
Is it everyone else that is wrong or is it you? When does it become your responsibility for what you tolerate in a relationship and not the lack of awesome men, but people aren't awesome, most people are mediocre, birds of a feather flock together, quality attracts quality, shit attracts flies
9 minutes ago, h inandout said:I hope I can find someone who has the courage to turn up the heat, but the awareness to cool it down too. Oxytocin enmeshes you in bad decisions. As soon as you put pressure on someone to do or engage in something they are not totally okay with, they shut down on a subconscious level and then do it anyways even though it feels aweful. Respect has something to do with recognizing that we are creating a relationship bubble in the real world where potential for pain is so very real.
Good luck with that
I think thats what the red pill can do, to help create awesome young men who now how to tune the nosel so to speak
10 minutes ago, h inandout said:I would say respect combines the courage to turn it up and the awareness to cool it down. It's like riding waves of moving closer and stepping back. It also requires self-respect on both parties. Unfortunately it takes a long time to learn self-respect. I think Scott Pilgrim versus the world is a good movie for this.
Before you enter into a relationship, especially the most intimate relationships, you have to have some level of self respect so you know what you will and won't tolerate
Lol - Scott Pilgrim seems like a terrible example for this, the guys like a dog jumping through flaming hoops for some girls mild amusement as she toys with him throughout the whole movie, in the end he fucks of with that other asian girl anyways, to be fair I havent seen that movie in years so maybe I'm wrong
-
I believe that a man that does not respect a woman is subtly communicating to that woman that he is better than her
A man that is respectful to a woman is at the very least presenting himself as her equal
Women don’t want a man who is there equal, they want a man who is there better
That’s why they are sexually attracted to and fuck dickheads because those men are showing that they have options, that they are confident and they are better than them
-
10 minutes ago, Roy said:I think the red pill more or less has some truths to it, but it's not holistic enough and comes from a place of biased and selfish orientation.
The red pill doesn’t have to come from a place of bias and selfishness, but tell what group that has any popularity that doesn’t?
11 minutes ago, Roy said:The thing I find most annoying is co-opting the pill scene from The Matrix....... makes people who fully believe in it think they're so fucking clever......lol
Yeah I agree 100%
Its really comes back to dunning kruger12 minutes ago, Roy said:Anyways yes culture does lie to us, about a great many things. It's all unconscious though, it's not really a malicious force that we should fear like so many people start to feel after they discover that some things are lies. People as individuals should just do the work to uncover and deprogram themselves from it. Instead of forming counter-cults and ideologies. Which helps slightly but causes a new set of problems to arise.
Yeah, and you’re not any less of a man for acknowledging that we’re lied to, and that the truth is uncomfortable
There’s a Nietzsche quote along the lines of
”In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
The moment a bunch of ideas turn into an ideology is usually the minute it becomes goofy
15 minutes ago, Roy said:mean that's why we're all here for the most part, to learn how uncover ourselves from the bullshit. Without turning Actualized.Org into the same thing hopefully.
Amen
-
14 minutes ago, h inandout said:I see that you have healthy skepticism and are willing to engage with uncomfortable opinions for the sake of cultivating a broader perspective. I see no issue with this. You aren't going to take this stuff so seriously that you damage your own integrity by applying it out of context, or by not really assessing the roots of the theory.
I try to, I don’t understand why people aren’t willing to engage any ideas
I take the truth seriously (kinda)
16 minutes ago, h inandout said:If I'm at a coffee shop and waiting in line, I don't care what age or gender you are, if you stop to create small talk with me, I will engage with you because ATTENTION is a human need, and is especially appreciated amongst women. I hope that your end goal with me isn't meaningless sex or manipulation. I am learning to bring more of that radiant solar energy to everything I do in life because it actually feeds me back to "pick-up" acquaintances.
Hunter S Thompson said
“Sex without love is as hollow and ridiculous as love without sex“
18 minutes ago, h inandout said:have an issue when a guy is talking to me and then tries to guilt trip me about talking back to him like I was just being a tease. For f's sake, I can't have a conversation even? Guys also should be using conversation to assess long term compatibility. But especially, remember that if you want something REAL with someone else, you have to recognize that relationships require serious time and energy on both ends. So, while getting to the goods might be a nice image in your head, really RESPECT should prominent. Respect is so insanely sexy. Respect is soooo sexy. Just talk with women because they enjoy talking and you are being kind to them, and then lean in gently if it feels right.
Respect is sexy sounds like bullshit to me
Many women find men sexy that don’t respect them
Respect is sexy just sounds like the right thing to say
19 minutes ago, h inandout said:Like seriously, if you respect me more than I've been taught to respect myself, it gives me permission to feel safe, to open up around you, to trust you. If you lean back gently sometimes, it helps me feel into the work you are putting in, and makes it easier for me to genuinely cultivate respect for you.
-
12 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:Don't associate red pill vomit with PUA, lol.
What exactly about red pill is “vomit”
Also if you look into the history of the “red pill” you’ll find that it originated from PUA and books like Mystery Method and The Game by Neil Strauss
13 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:These guys exist in polar opposites ends of the spectrum, red pills are pure victims, PUA's are more about taking responsibility, red pill is more about manipulating women and disrespecting them, PUA is more focused on providing value, giving love and fun to women and being equal and opposite partners to them and sort of going for win-win(-win). You can't really take the enlightened approach with Redpill, while with PUA - you can, because PUA is not based on ideology that much.
You seem to have mistaken low level of PUA for redpill.I believe if you the wrong impression of the red pill, definitely some of them are victims, but the red pill is a very large encapsulating group. I think that you’re the one that’s mistaken.
15 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:See the example of what real PUA is on the link below and read a book about Casanova, you'll quickly notice the difference, if you are openminded, of course
I’ll check the link out later, I already know about Casanova
-
38 minutes ago, tenta said:PUA advice is false and will not make you more attractive to women, you need good social status, looks, especially face and especially no bigger flaws, a deep voice etc.
Lol no PUA is going to disagree with you
”Hey, listen he kid, to get the girls you got to be ugly, fat, have big flaws in your looks, especially your face, and you got to be a friendless loser, trust me kid, that’s the best way to get duh girls”
-
PUA advice literally covers that as
Social Proof
And obviously being better looking and not having flaws is beneficial
A lot of PUA advice is sound
You haven’t said anything specific that is false, so what specifically do you disagree with?
-
If you want to know where I’m coming from when I think of the red pill watch that “do the work” video I just linked above, it explains things quite well
-
1 hour ago, Preety_India said:All the science they speak of based on empirical evidence acquired from relationships with a low quality crowd. If they have to be with a high conscious high quality woman, they will get instantly rejected and they will never stand a chance. Obviously they won't even try and try to make the woman look unattractive to justify them being rejected..
No, the science they speak off is widely accepted by the scientific community, basic biology, evolution, psychology, endocrinology etc... It’s not just a bunch of guys anecdotes, but when you take the anecdotes of 100s of thousands of men you begin to find patterns that aren’t just the result of low quality men, but if human nature, that can be recognised, understood, and systemised
1 hour ago, Preety_India said:All these men have to do is work harder on their manhood and be good quality men in the first place to attract good quality women. But they don't wanna do that. They don't want to change. So they take the short cut and blame everything on women and gender politics, feminism and biology. God made men and women perfect in their biologies. And good men understand this biology and don't exploit it, but rather align with it. The left over men are not interested in understanding the biology of a woman and they bring up distorted theories to suit their worldview..
This paragraph I found funny for a lot of reasons, mainly because a lot of the red pill men that I listen to are always on about working harder and becoming a bigger and badder motherfucker e.g.
I can find you tonnes of masculine, intelligent and decent men, who are in no way bitter and in no way can’t get women, who obsess over constant change and actualisation to develop themselves into better men
God made us perfect, I don’t know that depends on your perspective
I obviously believe in working on yourself and you be in no way bitter or resentful and should take personally responsibility for your own position in life, I lot of red pill ideology is about that
1 hour ago, Preety_India said:Red pill is garbage and red pill is lies.. And the matrix analogy is simply to make it look new-agey
I dont the red pill is garbage, although a lot of it is, and I wouldn’t consider it lies because it’s not conscious manipulation by the men who are wrong. The matrix analogy is just a good metaphor that was used straight after the movie came out, there is no cabal of secret red pill men who came up with the term because they’re new agers.
1 hour ago, Preety_India said:Red pill is the most dangerous philosophy in the world that consumes men and makes them toxic. If you want happiness, then don't fall into it.
“Most dangerous philosophy in the world“ lol
Not radical Islamism, not national socialism, no
The red pill lol
That hyperbole say a lot more about you than it does about these men your lambasting
The red pill is simply the truth, what you do with that is up to you
-
14 minutes ago, Preety_India said:Imo.... Not saying this is the general opinion or this is how it is.
At least you know it’s just an opinion
14 minutes ago, Preety_India said:Redpill = sexist male bullshit.
A lot of it is, but the entire point of the red pill is = the truth, it might not be flattering but it is what it is, a lot of the guys who point out the truth may be sexist but you separate what’s being said from who’s saying it, the shit that’s being said could come from a talking parrot, is it true though?
17 minutes ago, Preety_India said:These are male sexism apologists. They will do anything to not change their minds. And they have existed since time immemorial. These are not quality people with quality relationships.
Most people don’t want there Mind changed. A lot of them are sexists (though they don’t apologise for it). Most people aren’t “quality” people.
18 minutes ago, Preety_India said:The get their ideas about women from low quality relationships.. They use it to generalize all women.
Male female dynamics go deep and a lot to do with social conditioning along with biology.
Most of these men do not have or never had a functional relationship with a woman. A real woman..
Sure, most people are low quality (depending upon what you mean by quality)
Generalisations aren’t necessarily bad if are they true
I’d say all social conditioning stems from biology, why would society be the way it is if not for biological underpinnings?
A real woman is again a social convention
You have been talking a lot about “quality”, and really all it is, is the reinforcement of these rigid gender roles
Here's an experiment I recommend you do right now
Put into google "what makes a real man" or just "real man" and then put into google "what makes a real woman" or just "real woman", check the images and quotes and maybe read a webpage or two to get a general gist of the gender dynamic.
If you're paying attention you will quickly see the imposed cultural contract. Now despite our culture claiming to value equalitarianism, what you’ll see is we don’t. That’s something the red pill points out, that we’re pigeonholed into roles of “real men” and “real women”, and I find it derogatory. Just because you don’t fit into a role society foists upon you does not mean you’re not real or not quality.
All it seems to me is that you’re demonising and shaming these men, who’ve had negative with the opposite sex, from drawing and recognising patterns from these experiences.
29 minutes ago, Preety_India said:Any man with a working functional relationship with a woman and who doesn't need looks or money to attract women, will he ever join the following groups?
Probably not, because he doesn’t need to. What makes men look into the “red pill” usually is some forum trauma, your right, where a belief gets shattered or someone betrays them. To shame these men for that I find is wrong.
33 minutes ago, Preety_India said:The flat out answer is no. Because a happy man doesn't need to have theories on how women are. He cares more about being happy with her rather than thinking about how to keep her or himself happy..
Until that man gets burnt because of his ignorance and then seek the truth (the red pill - that’s all the metaphor is).
34 minutes ago, Preety_India said:All these groups represent frustrated and bitter men who seek a justification for their frustration through a Twisted philosophy to match their inner state of mind.. It's Called self deception not truth. Self deception masquerading as truth.
So far you haven’t stated anything about the red pill being false, you’ve just said that they’re self deceived, low quality, bitter and not real men, not why they are self deceived though.
35 minutes ago, Preety_India said:It's like the tale of the fox and the grapes. If the grapes are out of reach, the fox automatically assumes the grapes aren't worth eating because they are sour anyway.
This is the incel phenomenon, to some degree. Though many of them just hate themselves and pedestalize women. Yet again all your doing is shaming these men.
37 minutes ago, Preety_India said:Same thing. These men find a way to pigeonhole women into character roles so that they can legitimize their lack of success. They are unable to accept that they are fundamentally lacking something that creates a lacuna in their relationships. So to round it off, they go around spewing their sexist philosophy to avoid having to justify the lack of sustaining and healthy relationship with a female in their lives. So what do they do? They turn into womanizers and then justify it so that they don't have to feel guilty about having shitty one night stands with women.
So according to you, the red pill exists because these men can’t maintain healthy relationships with women, so they grow resentful of women and stereotype them. Creating a philosophy around that to justify there own shortcomings.
I agree with some of what you said.
Though I think plenty of “red pilled” men have perfectly healthy and functioning relationship with women, which there are dozens of example of. And I would say a lot of them don’t pigeonholed women, there’s a difference between stereotyping and pigeon-holding.
Note - my phone on 1% and I don’t want to lose what I’ve written, I’ll come back to this when I recharge my phone, I’m just gonna post what I’ve written for now
-
“All is fair in love and war” - John Lyly's Euphues
I thought that quote above kinda applies to this topic.
So heres a caveat anyway before I start, this is probably gonna be a long post as I write this, but I’ll try to keep it short.
Thanks in advance for anyone who takes the time to read.
So I’ve seen regularly on this forum, and pretty much all over the internet the idea of the “red pill”.
So first off here’s how I think is the red pill (if anyone’s got any different definitions share them).
So originally the “red pill” comes from these guys who are called pick up artists or PUAs.
And what PUAs are, is a bunch of guys who came together to learn basically how to get laid, and “pick up” a girl for casual sexual encounters.
The main idea is that getting laid is basically a skill, as a woman is pretty much right off the bat sexually attractive to most men, where as, as a man, most women are not sexually attracted to you.
So what PUAs do is to teach men how to become sexually attractive to women, basically to sell themselves to women, like the skill of learning to sell a car, to show that they’re high value, and that PUAs can teach a bunch of tricks that can help a man better his chances of getting laid.
So this gave regular guys who have trouble with women hope, as by saying “hey listen, getting women isn’t just some inherent genetic gift that domes guys have and others don’t, getting girls isn't only about looks and money etc…, no, it’s a skill that you can learn”, . The hope this gave was to help, what PUAs called AFCs (average frustrated chumps) to become attractive to women, if they just learn the skills.
What came from learning these skills were a series of concepts that PUAs created from their observations when trying to “game” these women, many of them are pseudo scientific, though some of there reasoning I don’t find faulty and find actually are backed by my own personal experiences with women and make perfect sense with my own understanding of evolutionary psychology (hence the point of this post).
So as the PUAs started building these concepts and backing them in science etc… this then became the red pill, reading from this article linked here, the idea of the red pill comes from the matrix.
“In practice, to “swallow the Red Pill” is to accept the uncomfortable truth about reality. The phrase comes from 1999’s hit film The Matrix, in which the protagonist Neo must choose between the Red Pill – which would allow him to escape the Matrix but see the real, darker world – and the Blue Pill – continued existence in his comfortable, but ultimately fake, life.”So the main idea of the red pill, is that there is this separation between most men who are deluded (the blue pilled) and the knowledgeable men (the red pilled).
And that most men have been lured into false beliefs about the dynamics between men and women, not because these beliefs are true, but because, they instead serve the interest of society, for men and women to be deluded.
For an example, the blue pill would be that men and women are blank slates from birth, that the only reasons that they’re are any differences in behaviour or cognition between men and women is sociologically not biological.
Where as the red pill, would be the idea that they’re biological hard wired differences between men and women’s natures, because of evolutionary reasons, that make us act and think differently.
Read this book if interested -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blank_Slate
This I would say is the main “red pill”.
But there are dozens of other ideas that stem from that, that help explain a lot of what’s current going on in society from a sort of anthropological perspective .
Now what sprouts from the red pill are a bunch of different groups, such as
-PUAs (pick you artists - guys who try to bang a bunch of women)
-MRAs (men’s rights activists - I think this kinda fits into the red pill a little)
-Incels (involuntary celibates - basically virgins)
-MGTOWs (men going their own way - men who don’t associate with women)
Etc…
All these people to varying degrees take red pill info and draw different conclusions from it, I’m sure there are probs other groups, but these are the ones that I can think of right now of the top of my head. When I’m asking about if the red pill is true, I am not talking about any of these individual groups, but some of the overall concepts that unite them.
These groups being united and sharing in common this fundamental red pill understanding, that questions widespread social norms, conventions and pre established ways of thinking.
So recently I’ve went down an internet rabbit hole looking into these groups and what they believe on social media, YouTube etc… and a lot of what I listened to were pretty much things that I already knew, (some of the time - other times it was bullshit) but these guys kinda broke it down and systemised it, turning this stuff into a science.
Now there’s a lot of stigma and controversy around the red pill, as they’re perceived as misogynists, bitter, womanisers etc…
Now I’d definitely say a lot of that it true, but I think generally it’s unfair and is used as a way to dismiss these concepts, and addressing these people and their struggles. But as the quote taken from the article says, the red pill reveals a colder and darker world, that a lot of people don’t like as it can be seen as depressing, if all you life you had this one idea, and it turns out to be wrong.
Do you think that are lies that we’re sold by culture about relations between men and women?
If not why?
And if you do believe there are lies than you basically accept the basic idea of the red pill, and then from there all these guys are trying to do is point out these lies, some people better than others. Anyway would like to hear some thoughts on this.
Cheers
-
8 hours ago, modmyth said:It's a lot like giving to yourself in a way. If you've never loved or cared about anyone enough to get direct pleasure from their pleasure, well... I'm sorry that's unrelatable. Legitimately.
Of course I have, I’m not a psychopath, lol
The point I’m making is that you, you still take pleasure in it, you’re right when you say that you’re really just giving back to yourself, or you wouldn’t do it
If you were in agonising pain every time you freely gave to someone you would’t do it, even Jesus Christ couldn’t have been strung up on that cross for purely altruistic reasons (I’m not Christian) and Jesus has reassurances about reality that we don’t have
Likewise even the belief in a god, is not for rational considerations and observations about reality, but instead the religious to are consequentialists
Why?
Because if they were told believing in god would send you to hell for all eternity and not believing in god will have them sent to heaven, what benefit would they have to believe in god
If a religion preached that I think it would struggle to spread
Even though the love of god is one of the most selfless loves that people have and even that on a hind brain level is just the weighing of the pros and cons for each action, I don’t know what else would be the best representation of an abundance mentality than the love of the whole universe, but still, it’s consequentialist and primal
8 hours ago, modmyth said:believe that energy is infinite in a sense, psychoemotional energy, but that tends to have limits as it expresses itself throughout time. In practice, having this sort of belief generates more energy. It is practical; it's not just woo-woo fairy wash.
I’m not sure I know exactly what you mean
But I see no reason why reality can’t be infinite, and it would limit itself as you, you are an expression of infinite reality, and the beliefs you have definitely shape your reality and the way in which you feel, I’m not saying what you’re saying is woo woo, reality itself is woo woo
All I’m doing is observing from my own experience and from my own reading what I think is human nature, and I don’t think it’s as free giving and loving as people portray it
8 hours ago, modmyth said:You believe in unconscious and biological drives which are insurmountable. So then, that dictates what you believe is possible for your consciousness. Ok. I am very well familiar with this mode of thinking. I think it's weak ideologically. As well as a recipe for misery.
How is my consciousness limited by a belief in biology?
People change beliefs, I could change my beliefs, and I already think of my self as an open minded person, this in part is what psychedelics are forI don’t think it’s weak ideologically, and you haven’t demonstrated why it’s weak, you’ve just said it will make you miserable, but feeling good and feeling bad isn’t proof that something is wrong, feelings anyway I would say are pretty separate from beliefs, feeling good and bad is more primal and instinctual than abstract
If you want to prove to me my ideology is weak prove first
How is my consciousness limited by a belief in biology?
How biology/nature can be surmounted?
And prove that anyone can do anything for non consequentialist reason? E.g. out of pure selflessness
8 hours ago, modmyth said:Look, I haven't exactly had a good life, especially for my early life. I have had significant amounts of trauma and abuse that I have written about publically here. I am well aware of many negative aspects of the reality of living on Earth. I myself could find many many reasons not to be open as I could, or not to give, to be bitter and to blame people, but I have decided that it's no way to live, even when going through some of those worst phases of my life. I didn't do it because I felt like I should do it. I did it for me, because it feels terrible to think that way. Honestly, does this way of thinking fulfill you?
I’m sorry to hear that
I would say I’m not completely a fulfilled person, currently, though I don’t say that’s because the way I think or the fact that I believe in biology, that humans have an inescapable nature, I’m not even necessarily saying that nature is entirely bad, find me someone who is completely fulfilled and wants nothing else out of life, those people are a rarity, I’m only 19, if I was a fulfilled person I’d be quite the bad motherfucker
8 hours ago, modmyth said:The unconscious is not a god. Biological tendencies are not a god. They may or may not have great power, but why the defeatist attitude?
I haven’t said that biology is a god, I said in the previous post that they’re these meta-physical, forces that effect us and we cant effect them, at least on a fundamental level, perhaps god acts through the unconscious to steer us (god the universe blah) it doesn’t matter the name
Im not a defeatist lolAnd you’re right the unconscious might not have power and might not exist, but it looks to me like it does, so I’m siding right now on that side until something either proves to me that I’m wrong, or I change my mind for whatever reason
8 hours ago, modmyth said:Everything that is unconscious/ subconscious, as we understand it to be, is very much capable of disintegration. Everything is capable of being imbued with absolute consciousness (and in another sense, is already present anyway.)
How is it cable of disintegration?
The unconscious is already present anyway, it’s present in consciousness to some degree otherwise it wouldn’t exist, but do we have control over it, not our fundamental nature, there are many forces placed upon us that we have no control over, we don’t have control over space, we don’t have control over time. And these forces drastically effect our lives, for me to believe that currently we can’t effect time doesn’t mean I’m a defeatist, I’m just drawing conclusions from the current evidence. And I believe the current evidence points that we also can’t control our fundamental nature.
8 hours ago, modmyth said:Look, I have skepticism about romance as it's understood to be too. I probably lack a certain kind of idealism at this point. But love is so much more than what you get, and it's not just about feeling good and fluffy. Real 'unconditional' love is absolute love, and it is the fabric of our reality. It's literally everywhere.
Yeah, well I don’t see people as absolutely loving creatures, considering all the death, war, senseless violence and needless poverty. Maybe you can have real love bordering on unconditional on mdma or if you’re bordering on insanity, but for the average person with the average brain it’s probably not something that’s achievable
8 hours ago, modmyth said:You have to set pure intentions for reality despite whatever reality presents you, AND also not put the blinders on. It's not mutually exclusive.
Reality is not separate from us, we are reality, so those intentions emerge from reality, I don’t know what you mean by “pure” what loving intentions, well reality doesn’t seem loving, also I think it’s contradictory to say that despite what reality presents you, no matter how unloving reality seems, still have loving intentions, and that somehow isn’t putting on blinders. Why is it not mutually exclusive?
8 hours ago, modmyth said:Why? Well, you don't actually have to, but the alternatives suck.
Life sucks for most people most of the time.
8 hours ago, modmyth said:People usually can either smell that shit (consciously or subconsciously to varying degrees), so you keep mysteriously attracting people to you who perpetually take advantage. It's really unfortunate and not right at all, but it is what it is. We're all stuck dealing with the reality of it one way or another, until we're not. Also mysteriously, when you change your mindset and manage to resolve certain things, you stop attracting or you actively repel certain types of people as well.
I don’t let people take advantage of me
If I do for whatever reason, then I deserve it for not having the balls to not let myself be taken advantage of
Maybe though youre just deluded because you changed your mind about people and then set on blinders but now you think you’re not attracting the same people but you really are
Anyway @modmyth , real good stuff ?
Got to the bottom of this probs with these posts
-
What do you consider personal development?
Your always (hopefully) developing yourself everyday
As @Elton said
Aim to be able to meditate longer and better
I don’t do Yoga, it’s something I need to learn, but your developing yourself via yoga with your capacity to hold a certain pose etc...
How much can you lift in comparison to last week, is your form good, endurance etc... How long can you run and how fast etc...
Subconcious training, I’m assuming is things like visualisations and affirmation etc...
How much did you read? How much of it did you comprehend? etc...
Everyday is a day of personal development, and really every second, if your not moving forward your sliding backwards
Every moment of everyday should be personal development
-
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:To feel love I need to prove myself, but I can't get the love because Im the one sabotaging it . And ofc I blame others . Then I hurt them because Im hurt, and then I blame myself for being bad. So again... I need to prove myself that Im good so I can feel love, but deep down I know that Im bad and don't diserve it .And this went on until I got depressed (I couldn't love myself so I blamed myself for that -.-) . I started pushing people away because even though they loved me , I cant feel it , so because I cant pretend and give back I pushed them away . Every girl that loved me I push her away, every girl that doesen't I chase . Its a loop!
I feel as though I can relate somewhat to this, I tend not to blame others though, I blame myself for my own failures
I wouldn’t say a girl has ever “loved” me though
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:The love that I thought was love was constructed In my head. I didn't felt the love I theorized about it because there was automatic reaction where I needed to think "do I diserve it or not?" instead of feeling it ....
I
I don’t relate to “do I deserve it or not” though, it’s just when a girl becomes interested in me I lose interest almost instantly, because a girl who be worth my time wouldn’t be interested in me
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:pushed people away because I felt that the game Im was playing I always lost. This is why Actualized gave me feelings I did't felt before
I started working on myself etc. But also it was an escape where I fed the voice in my head "ohh you see, you don't need others, you can do it by yourself" "I will prove myself etc" ... so I feel that you are doing the same
No I don’t think so
How it an escape to be happy with yourself?
I don’t consider that arrogance
I’m know I’m great
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:see that you are trying to prove your self to you ( you need to confirm that idea that you don't need "conditional love" from others, you can do it on yourself ) , and not to the people on the forum(but of course, you are projecting that ). This is why it feels to me that you seem arrogant(lack of love trying to get some love) , and this is why maybe some people are "opposing" you because you just can't drop the idea that you are maybe wrong (but consider that this people here are more conscious, in your daily life I bet you get into arguments and fights :P), and it became a debate where everyone is holding their position .
Maybe I’m wrong
The debates interesting because someone who might be reading this can weigh what I’m saying and what others are saying and come to there own conclusions
And it’s not like it’s a bad thing to debate, especially if it’s in text and saved because you can go back through this stuff and see people’s thought processes
I avoid getting into debates with people, 90% of the time, unless they ask for my opinion
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:This is what I meant when I said be like water my friend
Im young too. Im 24. I started Actualizing 2 years ago , and what made me grow so much last years is that I started holding my ideology loosely, I can't say I stopped debating because it is uncounscious deffensive mechanism, but I spend more time reflecting, observing and changing my behavior, and not debating that robes my growth 
You can debate and reflect, observe etc...
Debates are meaningless most of the time if your trying to change people’s mind, but in a forum when people make points and I respond to them, if I say something stupid then people can point that out and say where I’m wrong and I can come back to that and change my opinion
On 28/05/2020 at 11:54 AM, EddieEddie1995 said:Keep it up my friend ! I wish I was debating those things when I was 19 haha instead of playing LOL and jurking off to porn
Cheers bud
Your doing good stuff anyway with this post, seems like you’ve done some introspective work
-
I can relate to this
Whenever I know a camera is on me I’m become self conscious and get inside my own head
The best way I assume to fix that is just by being in front on a lot of camera and by trying not to overthink
Eventually it’ll just be like whitenoise and you won’t even notice it’s there
-
in Society, Politics, Government, Environment, Current Events
Posted
Edgy
Will the George Floyd protests spread throughout the world?
I doubt it
What would they be protesting throughout the world, the American police, what is your government going to do to stop America’s police, and why the sole focus on American police brutality, does George’s Floyd’s life have more importance as he’s an American Citizen than all the rest of the world that are subjugated by their corrupt despotic governments, where police brutality is the norm
No, we don’t give a fuck when some poor man from the third world gets his head kicked in by the police