756
757

Men are not scared of women. Men are scared of the state. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by 1trpposter

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=men+scared+by+women

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=men+intimidated+by+women

There's no shortage of articles by female authors who boast about how their intelligence or independence intimidates men. Here's a wake up call, lady, he is not intimidated by you.

What he is intimidated by, is the state. He is scared of the never ending army of policemen with guns and armor that you can wield against him if you levy the right charge.

When you declare to the world what a strong, intelligent feminist you are, he gets the impression you are aware of the power at your disposal, and the means by which you can inflict those powers upon him. Make the right accusation, and he is fucked for life. Naturally, they'd rather avoid you, which leaves you to vent your frustration: http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/10/hooking-up-when-youre-an-anti-rape-activist.html#

If it were just the two of you on an otherwise uninhabited island, he would have nothing to fear from you.

Lessons to remember

Never let your guard down. Follow the strict limits of the law. Do not give the government any ground to fuck you over. Keep your head up around women (and men) but always be wary of the state. And remember, women who proclaim to be intelligent and independent tend to be neither.


[–]PaulAJK 383 points384 points  (48 children)

Oh shit that anti-rape activist..."She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: “One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”

“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said."

Wow, bullet dodged there, dude. They hadn't even met and she was furius and convinced he was a would-be rapist. Yeah, this is a dangerous woman. She could fuck a guys life up is sooo many ways.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 211 points212 points  (12 children)

A woman like that is looking for any reason to be victimized. Being a victim boosts her ego because of all the attention she can derive from its announcement. She's an indoctrinated zombie created by school and msm media. Stay away.

[–]PaulAJK 58 points59 points  (1 child)

Stay away.

Yes, the hardcore member of this type is definitely in the "don't even touch once" bracket. Given the current climate in US universities it''s risky interacting with them at all. Anti-rape activists, alongside pyschos wives and gangsters daughters, should be on everyone's no-no list.

[–]RedPillOdin 43 points44 points  (0 children)

"don't even touch once" bracket.

Don't even get in the same room without third party witnesses.

[–]bloodshot_eyes 120 points121 points  (6 children)

Reminds me of a comment I posted a year ago, regarding identity politics:

Quite. If you look at the SJW reasoning, you will find that they refuse to allow anyone to participate in a group who is not a member of that group. Thus, only black people may speak on black matters, disabled on disabled matters, and so on. What's the biggest cash-cow of the feminist/SJW world? Rape. Thus if you want to participate in the most lucrative sphere; if you want a place on the highest cross on the hill, you must have been raped.

There are some that want it so badly that they're willing to lie in order to obtain the precious social collateral to participate in the rape discussion. Fortunately (for them) they have established a taboo proscribing any and all questioning of the veracity of rape claims, thus making the lie easier to execute. It's a really fucked-up system they've established.

[–]Billee_Boyee 35 points36 points  (0 children)

I was molested as a 6 year old. I don't really get into a lot of discussions with feminists, but when I do, and I pull the 'rape card' they inevitably say I'm lying.

You should see all the hamsters having coronaries when I say "Congratulations. You are a rape denier."

[–]2awalt_cupcake 26 points27 points  (0 children)

holy shit that makes too much sense

[–]BroozeCampbell[🍰] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There is nobody more free from criticism than the victim who has been championed.

[–]yomo86 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The taboo you mention is so ingrained in people, it is unbelievable. When I clerked at the DA's office the old fox-like fuck told me that at minimum 1/4 of all crimes are false reports - not necessarly intentionally mind you, but by definition people have of said crimes. Even if you assume the story of the victim is true, it does not border on criminal behavior.

For instance common law theft, a pretty standard misdemeanor everybody understands - you take something that does not belong to you, has an error rate of roughly 20 %. 10 - 20 % of all theft accusations are wrong by simply applying the law to the story the alleged victim tells. And now suddenly rape 'survivors' are always right.

[–]cosine88 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Black Lives Matter is angry at women for the Women's March and making it about women Trump insulted instead of just everyone he insulted.

They felt left out about getting to righteously cry in the spotlight.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Jesus christ, this is spot on. It's why the Columbia University mattress chick lied about her encounter.

[–]Elodrian 10 points11 points  (1 child)

That need to be victimized is a hallmark of a Borderline. It's not simple indoctrination; it's psychosis.

[–]RedPill115 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Feminism's #1 goal is not hating men. It's not. It's controlling women - what women think, what women are allowed to say, how women are allowed to feel.

Hating men is only #2.

Nothing says "I dominate you" more than getting someone to go seriously hurt themselves just to please you. If you've seen scenes from suicide squad, there's the thing where harley throws herself into a vat of chemicals for the joker and is willing to die to "prove" her "love" for him - that's the kind of mentality we're talking about.

[–]j33tAy 54 points55 points  (6 children)

“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said."

I don't even know what this means. He cares about consent? This is bad? What?

[–]1ToSeeAndToHear 24 points25 points  (3 children)

She was, from her fucked up perspective, just talking about consent. Which means he flew off the handle, essentially - had to not talk about consent or he was out.

Remember, these women think a man should never take offense at their own sexism.

[–]Spoopsnloops 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yeah, never mind the fact she basically implied he was a potential rapist, and that she made veiled threats to him.

[–]RedPill115 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It's not a fight "against" abuse, it's a fight for the right to "be" the only abuser.

[–]Spoopsnloops 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The sad part is the lack of shame in her attempt to turn this around on him by making it seem like he was someone who didn't respect her notions of consent and probably wanted to rape her, basically confirming her own delusions that this stranger was obviously a rapist.

It certainly had nothing to do with what she said.

[–]AttackOnKvothe 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Probably mad that he actually consents to consent.

Men are supposed to be evil rapist, remember? There is no way one man can be ok with a woman consenting, we must patriar...chize? everything.

[–]rorrr 75 points76 points  (9 children)

The end was even worse:

he made consent part of foreplay,” she reacalls. “You know, very

intentionally asking, ‘Is this okay? Is this okay?’ It was cute. It

was great.”

Most women's vagina would dry up in a second from this level of insecurity.

[–]1takethedive 59 points60 points  (4 children)

Actually, what I think is that the guy who fucked her so good he made it into her news article had more game than a lot of men. I identified rock solid amused mastery. Look closer.

He attracted her like anyone else, built comfort, escalated, she revealed her line of work, and he threw it in her face with a "you're cute, but this doesn't threaten me."

Next, he proceeded to make it overwhelmingly satirical ("You want me to touch you? Yeah? Where? Your pussy? Say it. Tell me you want me to finger your pussy. Louder. So loud the neighbours can hear. That's it. Beg for me. Good girl.")

What you read in the article was her hamster rationalizing her utter sexual compliance into her own narrative of only being with a guy who "seeks consent" despite the fact that she was dominated and his good little slut from the start.

As is verifiable in my earlier comment, she's absolutely a loaded gun and absolutely something to stay away from or risk total destruction. But I'm not reading the "she made this up to propagate blue pill behavior" like you did. I'm reading "holy shit, this guy has balls of steel and rock solid game."

[–]cosine88 22 points23 points  (0 children)

It could also be:

"Oh, Chris? He's adooooorable! I love him, he's such a great friend now, we cuddle all the time!"

[–]rorrr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's some expert level hamstering.

[–]reckful994 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Yep. Sounds hot as hell. "Is this okay?" over and over again would be so great.

[–]Billee_Boyee 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What's more is it'll be like that every single time.

Every

single

time.

[–]McLarenX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just imagine how much of a bitch you'd have to be. I can't even count the number of times I've been with a woman and had fake resistance. Truthfully, women need to be taught that if they didn't yell, scream, claw, kick etc. It wasn't rape. I don't blame most women for being confused based on the crap that's put out there for us to believe

[–]1takethedive 35 points36 points  (7 children)

It eats at me that there is an overwhelming percentage of blue pill men who are reading that and nodding their heads in agreement.

Just what have we gotten ourselves into? I read the article thinking it must have been satire, especially when I got to the quoted text, and it kills me inside that it wasn't.

[–]Philletto 26 points27 points  (3 children)

The real problem is not women but the men who enforce her bullshit. If you want to redpill, you need to be prepared to fight a lot of men.

[–]CrazedHyperion 2 points3 points  (2 children)

All the police that enforce the laws, knowing that they go against their gender, are nothing but whores, out for money for easy work. They compromise their principles pretending they are robots for the state, so they deserve zero respect.

[–]Philletto 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Its mostly Social Justice which is a made up term and its replacing all of the law system. Its now illegal to look at a woman in a manner she doesn't approve.

[–]CrazedHyperion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, in the US. But the pendulum is swinging back.

[–]HuddsMagruder 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I had to check it was on The Onion... the hamsters involved are on steroids and meth.

[–]gotyournumberm8 7 points8 points  (0 children)

We're in a place where men are so weak that they feel that acting like that is there greatest chance of getting a form of approval. That's how much women have men backed into a corner. They're still pathetic though.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

And even if she didn't, that attitude is toxic. The equivalent to him saying something like, "your not a two faced gold digging whore, right? I just want to make and stay safe." No normal sane person would want to create a relationship in the face of such accusations.

[–]Cesare_MA 22 points23 points  (1 child)

Holy hell just reading that gave me shivers.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Yeah, like arranging to meet a feminazi like Marilyn French, "All men are rapists, and that's all they are." You could totally relax and have a good time with her, right?

[–]sickofallofyou 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The way he handled that was very professional.

[–]McLarenX 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I thought the exact same. She was basically throwing out threats before they even went out on a date. What a fuckin nut.

[–]yomo86 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Yea, I chuckled, too. He was basically like: OK ma'am I don't think this is a good idea. And she goes off by the simple fact that one guy has a preference not to get fucked over or to be bossed around. Bullet dodged, indeed.

[–]RedPill115 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is truly scary that anyone eats this up, because the article is almost pointedly mocking her in it's layout.

Compare these two:

Then there were those who were a little too eager to make it know that they would never, ever assault a woman. "Their first response is ‘I’m not one of those guys, I would never do that,’" she said. "I mean, what, should I be carrying gold stars now?"
.
She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: "One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, 'This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.' And five minutes later, he was like, 'Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.'"

[–]tio1w 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She could fuck a guys life up is sooo many ways.

The reason they do this is because it's consequence free.

If some of these men that are blatantly falsely accused just seriously messed these bitches they would think twice or thrice before even thinking that course of action was acceptable.

It's men's fault for allowing this to happen. Instead of tackling the problem head on we commit suicide 4 times more often.

It makes no sense.

[–]Masupilamii 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That´s like a man who is going to his first date with a girl saying :"look, ive had my fair share of sluts in my life, so dont try to be one of those, okay?"

The woman would be OUTRAGED. How dare he assuming things when he doesnt know her at all blablabla.

[–]TRP VanguardHumanSockPuppet 172 points173 points  (3 children)

Women project their accusations.

When she accuses you of being intimidated, it's because you intimidate her.

When she accuses you of controlling her, it's because her goal is to control you.

When she accuses you of cheating, it's because she has cheated on you.

[–]FatGirlsInPartyHats 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You're the great sage of our time.

[–]cosine88 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That one time a girlfriend kept accusing me of viewing the relationship as transactional when all I wanted was her affection...

[–]Omnibrad 63 points64 points  (10 children)

The word "half" is scarier than any woman.

I watched my brother-in-law bankrupt his entire life just to spite my sister in the divorce process. So, she couldn't take the house or the car from him - but she still took his kids. Not just that, but the kids were used as leverage to extract additional money above and beyond alimony.

[–]squidracer 31 points32 points  (2 children)

It's never just half tho.

It's half, then the rest gets put on a payment plan

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Naw, they get to divide the property fairly with each taking a half. He gets the outside half.

[–]Hoodwink 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's half + alimony + child support if you get a bad deal or she successfully manipulates the court by trying to get into a fist fight with you or something.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Bluepillprofessor has a field report on here, his time at a psychology workshop... I think youll. Enjoy it.

Put after theredpill in the url

/comments/264mcx/field_report_bluepillprofessor_goes_to_a/

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 151 points152 points  (8 children)

intelligence or independence intimidates men

This is just hamstering for "men don't find me attractive". Heard it before from loud unattractive overweight women. Yes honey - it's TOTALLY your intelligence that's the problem.

As always when something doesn't work for a woman she puts the blame onto men rather than fixing the problem.

[–][deleted] 48 points49 points  (3 children)

Yep, never knew a guy who found a woman's intelligence unattractive and quite a few (myself included) who rather enjoy the company of a beautiful woman who can think.

"My career/intelligence/independence scares men away" is the female equivalent to "women don't like me because I'm too nice". Being an obnoxious twat is what drives men away just like being weak drives women away. It has nothing to do with being either smart or nice.

Also note that it doesn't add much to your dating CV for a woman to have a strong career in the same way it doesn't help to be a nice guy. I would generally prefer an accomplished woman if all other things are equal but I'm not dating a fatty to get it.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Who cares about her occupation. The female lead singer of a popular band is the same as the barista a starbucks. Just be attractive and not cause problems.

[–]TridentMixed 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yup, the only reason a lot of blue pill nerdy men get excited when they learn that a hot girl does nerdy stuff is because it humanizes her in their perception and they think they have a real chance at getting in between her legs.

However, if they only saw her as a hot girl who did "cool" things, they would automatically assume she was out of their league. They still want to fuck her as much as the nerdy girl, but to protect their ego, they say she's not their type.

[–]ThaRPTA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This, exactly. Intelligent women have often internalized the belief that they've been given a birthright to domination in society through their wit, and are thus more than willing to take on the patriarchy mythology when things do not go that way. It makes it harder for them to like men for being men, and that resentment permeates through relationships.

[–]Returnofthemack3 30 points31 points  (1 child)

lol not to mention that women with high levels of intelligence and independence usually have a decent job with good income, which precludes them from dating a LARGE number of men. I honestly don't think that most men give a shit if the woman is the 'provider', but it's hard to really know because most women will never give them a chance. No 'dating down' rule

[–]HobbesTheBrave 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Heard it before from loud unattractive overweight women. Yes honey - it's TOTALLY your intelligence that's the problem.

Obesity corrolates hard enough with stupidity. Smart people know why being fat is a slow form of suicide. If you can't understand, comprehend and fathom how obesity is dangerous, fine. We'll leave you to fend for yourself.

I meet well-educated, sane, attractive, very intelligent women daily, and they all despise fat people. Their children are thin, their friends are thin, they understand why their men picked them instead the other woman, and they don't hesitate when they're aggressive against anyone close to them getting fatter. They always follow through with that attack. They've heard every excuse for being fat, and they accept none of them. They're smarter than that, and if you're not thin, they will never ever learn your name.

[–]maniclurker 53 points54 points  (5 children)

This article had me rolling.

She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: “One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”

“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said.

I mean... What?! If she threatens every guy she talks to with the chief of police, then no wonder she has problems finding a guy that will fuck her. How do you get wary of rape from a guy you're meeting to fuck late in the evening?

Feminists are pants-on-head retarded.

[–]2awalt_cupcake 29 points30 points  (4 children)

lmao there's a suggestion that feminism is autism for women

[–]Hoodwink 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I disagree. My experience with it has been different, but college was 10 years ago for me.

There is an even mix of a sort Catholic/Mainline-Protestant/Jewish "good girl" activist type, an autist type, and the dark triad borderline/manipulative/narcissistic types.

The main point I would say is that there is a greater chance for a girl to be within the dark triad if she professes Feminism as an attack to control someone than in the general population who aren't proclaiming feminism. It's one thing to have beliefs about entering the workplace and competing against men, but it's another where they start trying to control you. It's similar to the way I've seen some 'Christian' women use it to control their men (and vice versa). It seems anything that moralizes will be used by these types.

[–]2awalt_cupcake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

who are you disagreeing with exactly?

idk man they're weird and I try to avoid them

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Endorsed ContributorFLFTW16 54 points55 points  (12 children)

    When you declare to the world what a strong, intelligent feminist you are, he gets the impression you are aware of the power at your disposal, and the means by which you can inflict those powers upon him.

    Exactly. Women are never really independent. Their "independence" is a facade guaranteed by men with guns. Men build and maintain society, protect it from invaders, and police it against bad elements from within. Even in the microcosm of a family living together when there is a "bump in the night" it is the father who creeps downstairs with a baseball bat in hand to investigate.

    Men, traditionally, have earned fame and fortune by going out into the wilds of the world, alone, with limited or no support network. They are your explorers, conquistadors, mountaineers, scouts, pirates, highwaymen, astronauts, missionaries, trappers, spelunkers, mercenaries, and hermits. And in the business world they are entrepreneurs.

    "Independent" is a hollow buzzword which really just means a woman who pays no respect for the civilization around her that men built, maintain, police, and defend for her benefit. In short by calling herself such she is advertising that she is an entitled brat.

    [–]gotyournumberm8 21 points22 points  (2 children)

    Anyone who says they are king is no true king. Real power just exudes itself from its source without effort. The more you have to tell people you're something it's just tiring to hear.

    [–]destraht 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Just like the hippies of Sebastopol, Northern California carrying on about finding themselves all of the time. As my old friend said "Just find yourselves already". I imagine that the ones who were successful in this endeavor shut up about it and moved onto other things.

    [–]gotyournumberm8 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    In a Tim Ferriss podcast with Arnold Schwarzenegger he alludes to doing similar in meditation in his youth. As I recall he spent a year on it and then was done after extracting what he needed. It's hard to argue that it didn't improve his life.

    [–][deleted]  (7 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]SovereignSoul76 9 points10 points  (0 children)

      300: Rise of an Empire. A woman who just SLAYS men in hand-to-hand combat, and is a competent leader of an army of savage dudes? Yeaaah, okay.

      Someone pointed this out on IMDB under the heading "Gorgo as female commander was an insult to both men and women" and this was a response:

      "This in itself is sexist against both males and females lmao. You do realize a lot of "feminine" and "masculine" attributes are social constructs? As in they have been made up at one point and then spread? Several aspects and/or things that are commonly thought of as male or female have been neither gender or thought as belong to the opposite once upon a time (easy example is the color pink, considered to be feminine, when it was at first considered a masculine color. Now you got guys like you probably, thinking it make a man look "womanly" if he wears pink. Btw high heels were also for males at first, yet a guy wearing that would get so much crap today for acting "gay". Do you even realize that the belief in rigid ideas about masculinity is one of the leading reasons for male suicide since it plays a huge role in causing anxiety in men? You whining over what? A female being assertive? Because that belongs only to men? That is utterly ridiculous. And lmao on women being "nurturing and wise". The idea that all women are nurturing is beep despite all girls being exposed to the idea that they should be since they are children (e.g. girls are almost always giving toys/dolls that they have to take care off, even if they have no interest). Guys are denied to be shown as nurturing as well as if there is someone wrong to care for others, especially their own children. No gender is inherently wise either. That is just a posterous (sic) idea."

      [–]iamneptuno 7 points8 points  (0 children)

      How in the world could it be bullshit if it's on Netflix?

      [–]AttackOnKvothe 6 points7 points  (1 child)

      Of course not, don't ever listen to those mysoginistic pigs. They are too scared of our great independence which we obtained by proxy of the policemen

      [–]CrazedHyperion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      They are movies, fantasy, something that you don't find in reality.

      [–]DruidFlyAwayToday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Wasnt this liek the first episode? Where the men went to some war conference leaving the women away and then some asshole invaders try to rape them and get owned by the women? Maybe it was something different, but I remember turning it off immediately and never returning to it again.

      [–]Mark-Man 24 points25 points  (1 child)

      Stay away from any woman who feels the need to tell you how 'independent' she is. Common sense.

      [–]5t3fan0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      yup, one of the easiest red flag to spot

      [–]1Entropy-7 15 points16 points  (16 children)

      Actual intelligence - high IQ combined with some common sense and social skills - is actually quite charming. Independent in the sense of not being needy or paranoid has it's strength as well. Neither is intimidating. The problem is that when women explicitly use these terms to describe themselves it's a weird sort of unconscious code for completely different thing.

      I've dated doctors and business professionals who are damn smart but they never had to point out how intelligent or independent they are; it was fairly obvious from their choice of career and simply how they conducted themselves in the relationship.

      When a woman feels the need to tell you how intelligent she is it usually means she thinks she is smarter than she is and you should therefore agree with her opinions and decisions. Combine that with independent - which generally means disagreeable - and you have a person who isn't intimidating, just annoying. I didn't date any of my classmates in law school and have no interest in dating a lawyer for these very reasons. High school teachers and journalists tend to have these personality trait as well as some doctors.

      As far as fearing the state well yes, it is getting concerning. However, women who are actually intelligent and independent are probably much less likely to call the cops on you or whatever. They don't feel the need to control you or fuck you over and will give you a firm no-means-no if you have some boundary issues. Even the annoying chicks are low risk with the exception of borderlines, rape/abuse victims and gender studies majors (the three of which seem to cluster together).

      And that anti-rape activist: how spergy does one have to be to not understand the guy's reaction to her reading him the riot act before they meet up? But he's the fuckboy?

      [–]Arroway2357 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Man, I've noticed that about school teachers. It may be that the profession just attracts the same personality type, but it seems that teachers are very often smug and whiny (e.g., those obnoxious "If you can read this, thank a teacher" bumper stickers. I've never seen a bumper sticker that reads, "If you flushed after taking a shit, thank a plumber"). They constantly complain about low pay, even though their income places them solidly in the middle class, and they get more generous vacation time than any other profession, even as a first year employee. Maybe they're just used to demanding that every person in the room hang onto their every word, since that's their entire day.

      [–]1Entropy-7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I have spoken to a number of lawyers who find that teachers can make the worst clients because they think they know (or can understand) it all.

      [–]RedPill115 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      And that anti-rape activist: how spergy does one have to be to not understand the guy's reaction to her reading him the riot act before they meet up? But he's the fuckboy?

      "I don't understand" is just a tactic. They're not fighting against abuse - they're fighting for the sole right to be the only abuser.

      If a guy told her "yo bitch, I don't put up with no mouthy bullshit you hear?" she'd be pissed. She'd tell you it's because no one should talk to her that way, but in reality it's closer to that she wants to be the one pushing the power play.

      [–]destraht 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      Probably my best relationship was with a Japanese woman whom came over a few months before starting at our top 10 US junior college. Due to the horrible renting policies here (in US?) she couldn't get a lease and so she lived in a not super cheap hotel for over a month. She had no friends and couldn't easily speak advanced English at that point and she was becoming isolated which was making it more difficult for her to communicate. I became serious a few years after her breaking in period and it was an amazing relationship. Fast forward some years after having transferred twice due to various reasons and due to being strung out on my computer science program and forced to be in classrooms with shades of dorky autistics, I found myself hanging out with some local girls. One of them aggressively proclaimed to me "You just can't handle a strong woman!". They just learn all of this feminist crap and they beat men up with it when they could simply be better. Its total crap around here and I do like women. Just not these women. Now after completing some objectives I will spend ten weeks remotely working in Colombia. Its real baad here in the North Bay and the only girl that has caught my attention in some months here has been a sweet as heck Western African girl who works at a nearby Chinese buffet. I could and would go there but better to build my software business and get to Colombia for that lifestyle where I can work and also have the female attention flow like water. I've spent six of the last eight years elsewhere and really only spent longer time periods here to watch over people after family tragedy. Also politically I feel like I'm living amongst the enemy.

      [–]1Entropy-7 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      There is nothing wrong with girls/women who are not on the fast track. Yes I've dated doctors and business professionals, and even entrepreneurs plus the occasional fashion model. However, some were housekeepers, administrative assistants, or held a slew of other not-so-notable jobs that I really can't remember what the heck they did.

      So hey, if a West African Chinese Buffet girl does it for you: go for it.

      [–]destraht 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      My point is mostly that that I don't care much for the women in my area and that the foreign women who come through here are much more endearing. In the last nine years I've had many women on three different continents and only a few hookups here and not a single girlfriend. I just don't like them here and the ones that I do well, I'm already running for the exits to get to a better place. Basically this is Hillary country.

      [–]youthoughtyouknewme 45 points46 points  (17 children)

      Intelligence or independence don't intimidate men, it just isn't attractive. Most women who use either of those labels often have an overbearing and unfeminine attitude as well.

      I know a single HB7 who just can't get any success with men. She says she's independent, has a great career, smart, owns her own home, etc. - all of which are true. She just doesn't get that those things are what women look for in men, not what men look for in women.

      Men don't want to date a woman who acts like a man. They want a feminine woman.

      [–]erowidtrance 18 points19 points  (0 children)

      Intelligence or independence don't intimidate men, it just isn't attractive.

      Independence of thought is an attractive characteristic. The whole reason so many women push feminist bullshit is because they're naturally collectivist and gauge their opinions based on other women. The ones that actually think for themselves are much rarer and very appealing imo.

      [–]1SeemedGood 9 points10 points  (4 children)

      Men don't want to date a woman who acts like a man. They want a feminine woman.

      Yes, but feminine doesn't have to mean stupid, weak, and childlike. That's girlishness and unattractive to many men as it's both dull and annoying and usually the sex isn't worth putting up with that.

      Strong women are attractive - not women who are masculine strong (to me anyway) but rather women who are feminine strong - women who can birth their babies at home and naturally where and how they are supposed to be born with the support of a midwife and her husband as opposed to birthing them all drugged up in a hospital; women who can run a household like clockwork, oversee the education of your children at home (where it' supposed to happen), and even collect and pound out the millet for your beer while you are off on a trading floor somewhere with your hunting buddies tracking down the next woolly mammoth to feed your families. The real and natural work of women takes intelligence, strength, and some degree of independence and that feminine intelligence strength and independence is attractive (to me anyway).

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]1SeemedGood 0 points1 point  (2 children)

        You know not of what you speak. Both (intentional) homebirth and home schooling have better statistical outcomes for child rearing than their widely accepted "modern-day" alternatives in the US.

        As for the rest, it was mostly allegory, but allegory that certainly expresses a viewpoint about what feminine strength is.

        As for your reference to the European Medieval Age, I fail to see how that applies except maybe as a relative measuring point for the general strength of women in the society maybe? If that's your angle, I would submit that women were likely much stronger, more intelligent, and more independent in Medieval Age than they are today. Think about that for a minute before you knee-jerk respond based on the view of the Medieval age that you have accumulated from TV and the movies.

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]1SeemedGood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          To the author(s) of this bot: You have a long way to go.

          [–]gotyournumberm8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          100%. You can be a feminine 2/10 and the honestly is appreciated. Attractive yet masculine acting women are just a real fucking shame. So much potential.

          [–]joh2141 10 points11 points  (3 children)

          Most people I met that claim they are smart or intelligent... or educated... are fucking retarded. And I live in a very competitive place for both looks and intelligence. Some women like to believe the harder you bitch the smarter you're being but usually people who bitch often and loudly are simply oblivious to a lot of things.

          [–]MysterManager 12 points13 points  (1 child)

          "Power is like being a lady... if you have to tell people you are, you aren't."

          Margaret Thatcher

          [–]joh2141 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Yeah. Like another thing that's said in RP. If you have to constantly defend yourself to prove you aren't a pushover or a pussy, you probably are both those things.

          [–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

          This is gold. I'm scared of political correctness and the fucking daddy government. Not you, meat with hair.

          [–]binrobinro 7 points8 points  (1 child)

          Also, record all interactions with women.

          [–]zezozio 8 points9 points  (0 children)

          This should be stressed more. The Aussie guy who saw the tinder girl jumped out of his balcony a while ago would have been royally fucked hadn't he started his voice recorder (plus the tons of fake rape accusations).

          Be safe: have the recorder on at all times when engaging these strange and beautiful but deeply unreliable Creatures.

          [–]gotyournumberm8 11 points12 points  (1 child)

          It's true. I've never been nervous about a womans ability to directly fuck up my life. What can she actually do? It's the blue pill brigade prepared to destroy your life backing her up. The thought of social exclusion when i'm right and never being able to come back from it is a constant fear for a man.

          It's another reason to absolutely remove blue pill men from your life. especially blue pill "friends" when you're around women. They will love the attention from being the shoulder to cry on, matched with their dismay at being your inferior they are that pathetic they'll do it for attention.

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          The blue pillers fold like cheap tents when you hold frame, challenge their bs and state your case. And anyone who blindly does what a woman says can be easily outsmarted and defeated. Women corroborating with other women within a social group is, on the other hand, a minefield. They talk and talk and talk about everything going on within that group, including who they're fucking within the group. Your fate is sealed in terms of your sexual accessibility to women after the first girl you bang and if you suck, no more pussy for you but if you drop 8 in of meat in her puss, the female competition will start and WWIII drama ensues. Red pill friends are hard to find IRL. And all women have bluepill orbiters. Make fun of them, it's hilarious how defensive they get.

          [–]1SeemedGood 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          Yes, but all of that noise is our effing fault for letting the state get out of hand - no matter where you are in the world (with the possible exception of Switzerland).

          If you are a US citizen that country's founders left you with both a governmental structure designed to protect you from ever having to fear the state and instructions on how to keep it in check (very handily summed up in the 2nd Amendment). If you are not a US citizen, both that country's founders and the Swiss have given you a roadmap - follow it.

          That you were too lazy to stay educated and follow the simple and clear instructions on how to keep government from being able to make you afraid in your own homes is not the fault of women. And it should come as no surprise that women have taken advantage of your laziness and used it against you. If that's a surprise you should probably read the sidebar.

          Edit: And yes, this applies to me as well.

          [–]chambertlo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          And remember, women who proclaim to be intelligent and independent tend to be neither.

          From my experience, this is the truth.

          [–]squidracer 8 points9 points  (1 child)

          Pretty much the biggest red pill truth. Women are merely playing the cards they were dealt.

          When you hold the Royal flush you have no reason to fold

          [–]gotyournumberm8 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          They are born with a shit har=nd. A product that has limited value for a limited time and they have to woo the other gender into fucking themselves over in a deal. In the process of which she will no longer find him attractive because she's beaten him. The whole situation is fucked.

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          "She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: “One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”

          “I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said."

          [–]HungryOnion 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          That woman's text is akin to the guy texting her about their eminent marriage and future babies before they even meet. If he did that I doubt the woman would even bother responding, prob just block and report him.

          [–]gecko408 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          I prefer a smart lady. I don't prefer a cunt.

          [–]TRP_Lee_zard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          I wonder, with these kind of women how would they react on a date if they tell me what they do and I instantly take out my phone and tell them - so you are OK if I record everything that we talk about and do - for our mutual safety of course.

          [–]lIlIIIlll 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Problem is, no one loves getting degraded in the bedroom quite like self described feminists.

          I think it's because if a girl truly values herself, she wouldn't ascribe to that leftist nonsense. By that same token, a mentally healthy girl won't let you spit in her mouth.

          [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (21 children)

          Government is inherently a beta institution. I've written a post on this before. Anarcho capitalism is the only political philosophy compatible with TRP

          [–]gotyournumberm8 17 points18 points  (8 children)

          Which would be a really poor situation. We're not animals. The blue pill society is necessary and was inevitable. Being red pill is like getting the keys to all the bullshit that goes with it. Red Pill in a red pill society makes you nothing special. We are all very lucky to know these lessons.

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (7 children)

          Actually yes we are animals, and you don't know for a fact that it would be a poor situation, not is blue pill society necessary.

          [–]gotyournumberm8 9 points10 points  (6 children)

          If there were minimal rules at all and we were 100% blue pill of COURSE we would be in a poor situation. Look at India. You NEED structure. I don't give a flying fuck what any of the edge lords in here say. Any extreme ideology is a fuck up. The world is many shades between two ideals. Any polarity fully embodied arrogantly denies this reality.

          [–]destraht 1 point2 points  (2 children)

          [–]gotyournumberm8 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          Whole country is structurally an abomination. There's a video of a guy on Youtube riding a C90 Honda through it and it is just a fucking shit show. Coming from a rich western country it's mind boggling that a billion people can live like that.

          [–]destraht 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          That was then. The poorest people are reportedly suffering far worse than that now. Very few care though in India and outside of it because those people contribute very little to GDP. Its projected that the devastation will be creeping up the food chain into the middle class and that there will be food shortages since many farmers were simply unable to find people with (the new) cash and so were forced to abandon their goods. Surely Indian GDP is already negative. The demonetization was idiotic. Either fantastically idiotic or diabolically brilliant if the truly desperate people (even by Indian standards) can be scooped up into some foreigner introduced all digital biometric system. Some say that the last remnants of British sanity, rationality and order are failing and that India will fracture and collapse further.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

          You don't need a monopoly on force to have structure. That's statist propaganda. The free market is much more efficient and cost effective at providing all of the services government does

          [–]gotyournumberm8 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          We're now ironically talking shades of force now which is what I agree with. Police as an example hate them or love them, they are going nowhere. There is more and less efficient systems for each period of time in which we live and we rarely calibrate it perfectly but man managing 7 billion people is hard as fuck so you make large all encompassing rules that most people hate but accept as a necessity. Any world with no structure isn't one i'd like to live in. I'd probably be dead by now. A world with an inefficient structure that I can use to win, I can deal with that world.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          This world already has no structure. It's chaotic, miserable, tyrannical, poverty filled, and governments murder mass quantities of people on a daily basis.

          A free society would be much more structured. Here's why.

          [–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 6 points7 points  (7 children)

          You need to read "The World Until Yesterday". Living among a bunch of strangers without some kind of government is impossible. Just read that great book, it gets into the knitty gritty details of current hunter-gatherer societies vs modern civilization in terms of government, religion, sex, childcare, food, exercise, everything.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

          You don't need a monopoly on force to prevent chaos. The free market can provide all of the services that government can provide except more efficiently and cheaper

          [–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 3 points4 points  (5 children)

          In theory or smaller numbers. The tribal mindset of humans and the way humans naturally solve conflicts would never work. It's either a talk/resource offerings, or a constant chain reaction of revenge violence from relatives. You really need to pick up that book. It explains better than I ever could. It's a great read regardless of motivation.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

          We have a constant chain of violence now, it's called war. It happens way more now than it would in a free market system because the state has the ability to force other people to pay for it

          Violence happens less often when you're forced to pay for it yourself

          [–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 3 points4 points  (3 children)

          Violence today is bounded to soldiers and other fighters, and often over seas. Without some kind of government, the war stays home in your backyard.

          Isolated hunter-gatherers that venture in an arbitrary part of land that another tribe wants? Attacked or raped.

          A conflict that occurred months/years ago that you had nothing to do with? Sleeping by the fire in YOUR sector? Someone from another tribe sneaks into your camp and revenge kills you out of anger.

          The reason you are comfortable around strangers is because you usually speak the same language and subconsciously know that a uniform system of law is in place to punish. Read that book I referred to you, tribesman are terrified of strangers. They either run away or immediately attack them. The first page starts out at an airport filled with people you've never seen and won't ever see again, and you have no problem with it. Then explains why that is so. In the book when westerners took over isolated tribal areas, tribesman felt relief adopting civilization specifically because they didn't have to constantly watch their six.

          That doesn't even begin to touch upon how you would conduct business and trade beyond small quantities and short distances. You need some kind of commercial law in place to protect inventory, contractual obligations, travelers, and your assets.

          There are many problems with government today, much of which is caused by the Federal Reserve banking system. But going full anarchy is not the answer. It's a mix of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and modern civilization.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

          Except wars would almost never happen in the first place, because they are very expensive. If you can't force other people to pay for your wars, they don't happen in the first place.

          The rest of what you said doesn't have anything to do with anarchy. In an anarchist society, people would voluntarily fund private police/milita businesses that would protect their life, liberty, and property from this sort of behavior. Here is a good video that summarizes how conflict resolution would work in an anarchist society

          [–]DruidFlyAwayToday -1 points0 points  (1 child)

          Stop fucking arguing for the sake of arguing and read the damn book, or go do your own first hand research with hunter gatherer tribes, ffs this is basic bitch behavior, stop it.

          [–]CrazedHyperion 2 points3 points  (2 children)

          Goverments CAN BE bluepill. Of course you want to protect the weak in society - children, older persons. Of course you want to protect people against violence, especially from outside violence and maintain a modicum of continuity throughout time.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          All government is blue pill. The state is premised on the idea that it's justifiable to initiate force against individuals. That's called breaking frame.

          [–]CrazedHyperion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          But it would be justifiable for individuals to initiate force against individuals? By using the word 'justifiable' you imply that there has to be a set of ideas that determine what is just and what is not, so, in my humble opinion, that would be one of the tasks of an ideal government. (I never thought I would have to come to the defense of the idea of government :-) )

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

          [–]1RPAlternate42 1 point2 points  (4 children)

          Anti-Rape Activist: Her name is "Allison P. Davis."

          She's a fat piece of work.

          [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

          She's definitely a fat piece of work, and a raging feminist, but she's just the author of the piece. The "Anti-Rape Activists" quoted in the story are

          [–]1RPAlternate42 3 points4 points  (1 child)

          "Anti-rape" activists... like they are some how distancing themselves from the "pro-rape" activists.

          The one on the right in the first picture is kind of cute, but her friend is cuter.

          [–]CreamiestCream 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Finally an article of substance.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

          [–]CrazedHyperion 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          Intelligence comes in many forms.

          [–]TridentMixed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Damn...never thought about it like that. Good post and analogy with "the island" example.

          [–]Stythe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          The link is full of cognitive dissonance from the women. I could quote the entire article but my faves are

          “Nobody ever explicitly said, ‘Oh you’re a survivor, we can’t date,’” she told me. “But they’d assume that I was just doing this for attention, or more frequently they didn’t want to deal with it. It was too much. They assumed I’d have a lot of needs.”

          Then there were those who were a little too eager to make it know that they would never, ever assault a woman. “Their first response is ‘I’m not one of those guys, I would never do that,’” she said. “I mean, what, should I be carrying gold stars now?” So here we have "If you don't want to deal with it, fuck you. If you're willing to deal with it, fuck you." This is a damaged individual who's need is to be in control, not to protect anyone.

          The other

          “Just because someone wants to socialize and date doesn’t mean we’re bad victims or that our experiences haven’t been that bad,” Warner says. “When we talk about sexual assault or prevention, there tends to be the perception of ‘oh, you’ve ruined someone’s life.’ My life was not ruined.” Warner says. “People heal at different rates. Some people can’t date and they aren’t ready and they might never be ready. But we’re not broken. What happened to me had a lasting impact on my life, but I still enjoy my life.”

          Actually she can't do what most people do. She cant socialize. She is broken. If I bought a wind up car, wound it up and it just sat there, I'd consider it broken. If a personal cat date and socialize, they're sexually broken.

          For Shits and giggles

          She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: “One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”>>“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said.

          This one is dumb as a box of nails. This is like me saying "Listen, I beat women. I know gang members who silence women I beat who want to talk. Just know that before we date."

          Fuck outta here.

          [–]ecosci 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          This is true but thier pros and cons now if the state wasnt here to protect betas would never get a chance to mate just the true alphas so thats why women respect and love badboys so much because they dont really care about the state but she will go out of her way to fuck up a beta bux life.

          [–]Mckallidon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Exactly. Smart, strong, independent women (they aren't) are more trouble than they are worth.

          [–]logicalthinker1 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

          The state is just the collective betas fighting back against alphas

          [–]Endorsed ContributorWoujo -4 points-3 points  (9 children)

          He is scared of the never ending army of policemen with guns and armor that you can wield against him if you levy the right charge.

          I'm not scared of the state. The state is just a bunch of people doing their job. It can be manipulated and used like any institution if you're smart enough. Just learn the rules.

          [–]rorrr 6 points7 points  (5 children)

          Until you meet a crazy bitch who considers something normal a rape, and calls the police on you.

          [–]Usdom 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Yeah, I had that happen. I was hanging out with a female friend cooking. I had a big pot of boiling pasta in my hands and she was standing in the way to the sink. I said, "Beep! Beep!" like I was a car and she ignored me because she was talking on her phone with her boy friend. I kneed her in the butt cheek and said, "Hot pasta, coming through!" Then finally she moved.

          Later on that night she said she felt like I had raped her because I kneed her in the butt and she had to tell her boy friend about it and she didn't understand why he wasn't taking her feelings seriously.

          Needless to say, she's single now.

          [–]Endorsed ContributorWoujo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Be safe, keep a record of what happened, learn the law, and know your rights. Like I said, learn the rules and you'll be fine.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [removed]

          [–]CrazedHyperion 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          That lifetime may be a lot less than 18 years. Think of all the stress you expose yourself in the process.

          load more comments (2 replies)