
The Republican Lawmaker Who Secretly Created Reddit’s Women-Hating ‘Red Pill’ - leephillips
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/25/the-republican-lawmaker-who-secretly-created-reddit-s-women-hating-red-pill.html
======
FrozenVoid
>Women-hating Red Pill If Red Pill is about hating women, what explains this
subreddit existence? Women discussing best strategies to hate themself?
[https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/](https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/)

~~~
gdulli
Women are all different and have a wide range of views any topic. Some women
are offended at the idea of women having a subservient role in society. Some
don't feel strongly either way. Some believe that women should have a
subservient role. The psychology of a woman wanting to be kept down is
obviously not the same as that of a man wanting to keep women down.

Whether you call one or the other or both "hating women" is just a label and
is irrelevant to the point that fighting equality is an unenlightened and
unfortunate direction.

~~~
thanatropism
So I can see three cases where one would want to look down or discourage these
"voluntarily submissive" or "voluntarily traditional" womens (and groups of
women).

(1) That these people are "trapped" into a worldview, somewhat like in anti-
religious cult thinking or as in the Marxist concept of "alienation".

(2) That they enable "wrong thought patterns" on men and/or ultimately promise
the impossible (to employ some feminist jargon, to oscillate between the
madonna-whore poles at will); and

(3) That they provide "unfair competition" to women who are not willing to be
submissive/traditional.

So.

Are we willing to discard (1) as more or less the exception and not the rule
in an enlightened society? If not, we could slightly tweak our "Women can be
anything they want, including submissive homemakers" and please everyone
(provided we've discarded (2) and (3))

Item (2) is interesting in that I don't know it can be adequately discussed
with some voices from the red-pill-women movement. At any rate, red-pill
societies for men and women should fix the miscommunication issues where a
red-pill man meets a girl and expects her to red-pill herself. Put it this
way: maybe red-pill is something like a fetish and we should be encouraging
these people to join up in god-fearing red-pill households (in the process
keeping red-pill men away from blue-pill freedom-loving girls).

Item (3) is less silly than it sounds like -- you don't need to buy into Red
Pill to see "sexual market" (as in your relative position in the
attractiveness distribution) as something that sort of exists in the
aggregate. Fat girls have lots of legitimate complaints here -- that thin
women have it better in many aspects of life. But to fix this, you'd have to
educate men (all men) into not wanting those things red-pill girls are
advertising, which is kind of Orwellian and not unlike trying to educate gay
boys into wanting girls.

I say (as a male into women): this isn't a kind of relationship I've had, and
may be even intimidated by the idea of having to cough up the grrr masculinity
to complement a red-pill partner, at least on a continuous basis. But I know
couples that do this very well. I know an engineer that quit the whole thing
because she wanted to have kids and raise them rather than do the STEM thing
she was pushed into.

So can we ease up on the social engineering? Or is my analysis of (1), (2) and
(3) wrong?

~~~
gdulli
The redpill community is not an embarrassment because it's unacceptable in
principle that some men prefer submissive women or some women prefer to be
submissive. People can want what they want and it's not my business.

What makes redpill an embarrassment is the tone, the stuff like pretending
than men are the real victims in our society, the worldview that partitions
men into alphas and betas. The need to see men vs. women as a zero sum game,
or fundamentally adversarial.

Stuff like this from the glossary:

> CC, or Cock Carousel – The period of time in a woman's life where she
> successfully exploits her sexual value and maximizes her hypergamous
> tendencies by having sex with as many alphas as possible. Usually happens
> between ages 18 - 27. Often ends when the woman hits the wall.

> Feminism – ”A doctrine built on the pre-supposition of victimhood of women
> by men as a foundation of female identity.

This view of the world says more about the men than the women they're trying
to describe. It's not that there isn't any reality to any of these concepts.
But it's poisonous to view the world with cynicism and reduction to these
concepts as the ones that primarily motivate people. Rather than seeing people
as complex individuals who struggle with these concepts but work towards
overcoming them, or aren't primarily defined by them.

It's like how the_donald is the cringiest bullshit, but not because I tend to
disagree with Republican policy positions. I don't even necessarily disagree
with all of them.

And I'll definitely say that liberals sometimes have extreme views and tactics
worthy of ridicule as well. It can be easier for me to find common ground with
a Republican who rejects Trump's bullshit than some extremist liberals.

~~~
thanatropism
Wait, you're saying these things are true but it's poisonous to say so?

Or, more charitatively, that reality is composed of a large spectrum of true
things and it's poisonous to emphasize the kind of true things they're saying?

(Or, to comic effect, that a three-valued logic of true/false/cringe is needed
to evaluate social theories like that?)

\---

Here's how I feel about those "hatefacts". First, I don't know that they're
true - ages 18-27, really? I know to some extent that Bono from U2 might be
able to just waltz in and steal or have sex with my girlfriend. But here's the
thing: I don't need to care. I firmly believe in the stoic distinction between
stuff that's "up to me" (and I can fight for) and stuff that's not. I know I'm
not about to become the protagonist of "Magic Mike 3" or some such optimally
attractive man. I also know I have my own kind of charm which I can develop
and let the dice roll.

It seems to me that the Red Pill stuff is structured exactly like class (and
generalized "oppression") resentment. There are extraordinarily fine things
and experiences I cannot afford in my current station in life and there are
extraordinarily attractive women in the world (I saw a bunch today) that I
will probably never enjoy as a mate. (Red Pill would likely say that if I
became wealthy I'd get the girls, but doesn't that defeat the point?) But if
you're going to be happy at all in life you need to do what _you_ can do.

So Red Pill literature reads to me a lot like gender wage gap or black-lives-
matter literature. It comes out of a place of disconnect between actions (what
I can do) and consequences (what the world gives me) that's actually real. Of
course the world's not fair. But it's sometimes painful, isn't it?

~~~
tptacek
No, neither of those were what they were saying.

~~~
thanatropism
gdulli (the grandparent) did say

> It's not that there isn't any reality to any of these concepts.

So he's not saying they're _false_.

I think I'd be more comfortable with the assertion (on vague authority I'd be
willing to believe) that Red Pill ideology is false and that's why we're
supposed to oppose it.

------
PaulHoule
It is not that big of a deal to be a NH state legislator; even though NH is
one of the smallest states, it has more legislators than any other state.

~~~
douche
It's also basically a volunteer position. I think they pay gas money to get up
to Concord, but that's about it.

~~~
kesselvon
and a $100 dollar yearly stipend

------
eli_gottlieb
Any attempt to equate reddit-activism with real politics should terrify those
of us devoted to sanity and rationality in politics.

~~~
eganist
They're totally equatable, as is 4chan-activism, when you consider that Comet
Ping Pong was shot up by a terrorist who believed the pedophilia ring lie.

Reddit and 4chan activism have spilled out onto the streets often enough to
make them serious considerations.

------
jstewartmobile
This article is a long sloppy list of tenuous connections and hazarded guesses
to single out a nobody as a public enemy.

Whatever this guy is, it probably isn't any worse than the flip-side
McCarthyism they're attacking him with.

------
thinknot
Why was this article written under a pseudonym? The author, "Bonnie
Bacarisse", appears nowhere in the internet, other than this twitter account
created just yesterday:
[https://twitter.com/bbacarisse](https://twitter.com/bbacarisse)

